1. LN is not deployed because it is conservatively developed like all development in a space with $500B on the line. 2. My claim is simply that Bitcoin is wort

1. LN is not deployed because it is conservatively developed like all development in a space with $500B on the line. 2. My claim is simply that Bitcoin is worth significantly more with LN than without? You then take a more preliminary argument that Bitcoin is worthless to begin with, which is laughable. 3. 6 on-chain transaction fees that support millions of off-chain payments. And your hub argument is a feature of a distributed network itself, not of LN in particular. Say a "hub" emerges and starts charging fees. Market competition paired with efficient routing solves this easily. If you don't understand Brahm's argument, I suggest reading through it again. He's a pretty smart guy when it comes to distributed networks.