4 ms·

I actually said: Except that those transactions don't count until they get on the main chain While you quoted me as: > those transactions don't count You lo

I actually said: Except that those transactions don't count until they get on the main chain While you quoted me as: > those transactions don't count You lost some of my message. Maybe your are reading it through a lightning node and it went offline half way through. There is no such "single penny" limit. No one said that, but lightning's examples are always these nonsense situations of paying a single party a thousand times. What problems? A transaction rate that could fit over the bandwidth of a 28.8 modem. If you have to misquote people to make your point, maybe you're on the wrong side of the argument.

someplaceguy 3y ago
> You lost some of my message. So what's your point? Your point is that the balance will be reflected in the first layer after some time instead of being reflected after each and every lightning transaction? What does that have to do with what we were talking about? The point of this thread was how many transactions per time period you could do with Bitcoin, not whether the balance will be public information in real time? > lightning's examples are always these nonsense situations of paying a single party a thousand times. It's not a nonsense situation. Micropayments is something you can (trustlessly) do with Lightning but not with traditional payment technologies. It doesn't mean you can only do micropayments with Lightning. > A transaction rate that could fit over the bandwidth of a 28.8 modem. I just told you that Lightning can transact orders of magnitude more than that. You can do millions of Lightning transactions per Bitcoin transaction. You are complaining about Bitcoin's transaction rate limit but my whole point is that Lightning allows you to have an effectively limitless transaction rate (under certain conditions, at least), even if it requires occasional Bitcoin transactions to settle balances.
- CyberDildonics 3y ago
  Lightning allows you to have an effectively limitless transaction rate Transactions that don't count and aren't useful to anyone until they become a bitcoin transaction, and that's still expensive and slow. No one cares about it because it is terrible technology that doesn't actually solve anyone's problems, because the people that made it made the problems in the first place.
  - someplaceguy 3y ago
    > Transactions that don't count and aren't useful to anyone until they become a bitcoin transaction, I have no idea why you're making such an obviously false assertion. These transactions obviously "count" and are useful to the entities running those 15K Lightning nodes (many on behalf of multiple customers), which can all transact amongst themselves over the network, even without touching the Bitcoin network (or occasionally doing it just to settle balances). These transactions have almost exactly the same cryptographic and trustless assurances as normal bitcoin transactions, which are far superior assurances than those provided by traditional payment / money transfer technologies. > No one cares about it because it is terrible technology that doesn't actually solve anyone's problems I think you are confusing your own ideas and problems with other people's ideas and problems. Just because you don't care about it doesn't mean that other people don't (or that even you won't in the future, if your circumstances change).
    - CyberDildonics 3y ago
      which can all transact amongst themselves I can trade IOUs with a bunch of people in my local cult, but they aren't money until someone makes an actual USD transaction.
      - someplaceguy 3y ago
        > I can trade IOUs with a bunch of people in my local cult Lightning transactions are not based on IOUs. IOUs can be defaulted upon, while BTC received over Lightning cannot. Also, you need the cooperation of the other party to redeem IOUs. Lightning transactions don't require cooperation for settlement, they can be settled at any time by any of the parties. All of this means that the BTC that is exchanged over Lightning is just as valuable as any other BTC, unlike IOUs. > they aren't money until someone makes an actual USD transaction That's because your definition of "money" is USD, so your sentence is a meaningless tautology. It's like saying "raw beans aren't real food until someone cooks them". Uhm, sure, but does that mean raw beans aren't valuable or that you can't easily convert them into food if necessary? And what's your point even? This point is equally applicable to the first layer. BTC received over Lightning can easily be exchanged for USD if you want, or (even easier) for BTC in the first layer, so why does this point matter at all?

someplaceguy 3y ago

> You lost some of my message. So what's your point? Your point is that the balance will be reflected in the first layer after some time instead of being reflected after each and every lightning transaction? What does that have to do with what we were talking about? The point of this thread was how many transactions per time period you could do with Bitcoin, not whether the balance will be public information in real time? > lightning's examples are always these nonsense situations of paying a single party a thousand times. It's not a nonsense situation. Micropayments is something you can (trustlessly) do with Lightning but not with traditional payment technologies. It doesn't mean you can only do micropayments with Lightning. > A transaction rate that could fit over the bandwidth of a 28.8 modem. I just told you that Lightning can transact orders of magnitude more than that. You can do millions of Lightning transactions per Bitcoin transaction. You are complaining about Bitcoin's transaction rate limit but my whole point is that Lightning allows you to have an effectively limitless transaction rate (under certain conditions, at least), even if it requires occasional Bitcoin transactions to settle balances.

CyberDildonics 3y ago
Lightning allows you to have an effectively limitless transaction rate Transactions that don't count and aren't useful to anyone until they become a bitcoin transaction, and that's still expensive and slow. No one cares about it because it is terrible technology that doesn't actually solve anyone's problems, because the people that made it made the problems in the first place.
- someplaceguy 3y ago
  > Transactions that don't count and aren't useful to anyone until they become a bitcoin transaction, I have no idea why you're making such an obviously false assertion. These transactions obviously "count" and are useful to the entities running those 15K Lightning nodes (many on behalf of multiple customers), which can all transact amongst themselves over the network, even without touching the Bitcoin network (or occasionally doing it just to settle balances). These transactions have almost exactly the same cryptographic and trustless assurances as normal bitcoin transactions, which are far superior assurances than those provided by traditional payment / money transfer technologies. > No one cares about it because it is terrible technology that doesn't actually solve anyone's problems I think you are confusing your own ideas and problems with other people's ideas and problems. Just because you don't care about it doesn't mean that other people don't (or that even you won't in the future, if your circumstances change).
  - CyberDildonics 3y ago
    which can all transact amongst themselves I can trade IOUs with a bunch of people in my local cult, but they aren't money until someone makes an actual USD transaction.
    - someplaceguy 3y ago
      > I can trade IOUs with a bunch of people in my local cult Lightning transactions are not based on IOUs. IOUs can be defaulted upon, while BTC received over Lightning cannot. Also, you need the cooperation of the other party to redeem IOUs. Lightning transactions don't require cooperation for settlement, they can be settled at any time by any of the parties. All of this means that the BTC that is exchanged over Lightning is just as valuable as any other BTC, unlike IOUs. > they aren't money until someone makes an actual USD transaction That's because your definition of "money" is USD, so your sentence is a meaningless tautology. It's like saying "raw beans aren't real food until someone cooks them". Uhm, sure, but does that mean raw beans aren't valuable or that you can't easily convert them into food if necessary? And what's your point even? This point is equally applicable to the first layer. BTC received over Lightning can easily be exchanged for USD if you want, or (even easier) for BTC in the first layer, so why does this point matter at all?