6 ms·

The Lightning Network isn’t working as intended and the devs have basically admitted it’s never going to though. I don’t think blockchain as it is built for the

The Lightning Network isn’t working as intended and the devs have basically admitted it’s never going to though. I don’t think blockchain as it is built for the btc network is as scalable as you think it can be.

jazzyjackson 3y ago
huh, can you give me some context? I never used lightning but it sounded like it was maturing, what went wrong?
nikolay 3y ago
Is this why Coinbase does not support it?
- siwatanejo 3y ago
  Coinbase is a joke as an exchange. Other behemoths exchanges support it, such as Kraken or Binance. But I recommend you p2p exchanges, which don't require KYC, e.g. RoboSats or LNP2Pbot.
  - nikolay 3y ago
    It's the only exchange without a bad reputation, theft, inside trading, etc.
npoc 3y ago
I offered the Lightning Network as a single example. I don't agree with you, but it's largely irrelevant at this stage. The fact is that Bitcoin is very likely to absorb a vast percentage of the worlds value simply as it is. Once this has happened its value will stabilise and it will become useful as a unit of account/day-to-day currency. By this point, there will be far more motivation to focus on developing solutions (such as Lightning) to allow smaller and faster transactions.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > The fact is that Bitcoin is very likely to absorb a vast percentage of the worlds value simply as it is. You present this as a fact, but the actual valuation of Bitcoin doesn't seem to support this claim. John McAfee bet (and proverbially lost) his testicles on broad estimations of Bitcoin's continued growth. Without extraordinary evidence, you can't make claims of extraordinary provenience. > there will be far more motivation to focus on developing solutions (such as Lightning) to allow smaller and faster transactions. If you need an L2 transaction layer to solve an issue inherent to an L1 chain, you're kinda just admitting that the base layer is flawed. Why use Bitcoin at all if we need mediators to settle regular transactions? The "we'll fix it later" mentality works for shitty altcoins that have nothing to lose by reinventing themselves, but I'm not convinced Bitcoin can change. I was mining Bitcoin about a decade ago now, hearing people say "Lightning will work soon" or "a good interchain bridge will exist eventually" in 2024 leaves me convinced nothing has changed. It's a race between the economics and the technology to see which becomes outdated first.
  - thinkmassive 3y ago
    > If you need an L2 transaction layer to solve an issue inherent to an L1 chain, you're kinda just admitting that the base layer is flawed. On a similar note, TCP is an admission that IP is flawed. And HTTP is proof that the entire networking stack is a scam. Clearly, any decent networking protocol would handle any and all information interchange anyone could ever need. The fact that HTTP is on its third iteration, and it’s still built in top of the same Internet Protocol from 1974, proves that _nothing_ has changed. /s
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      None of what you said is inherently wrong. Much like the OSI model, if you reinvented Bitcoin today it would look much different. Unlike the OSI model, Bitcoin's solution to finance is not modular or all-encompassing. If it's not going to adapt to modern demands, it will get replaced. There's no point in keeping around a financial solution that is impossible to fix when it breaks.
- 3y ago

jazzyjackson 3y ago

huh, can you give me some context? I never used lightning but it sounded like it was maturing, what went wrong?

nikolay 3y ago

Is this why Coinbase does not support it?

siwatanejo 3y ago
Coinbase is a joke as an exchange. Other behemoths exchanges support it, such as Kraken or Binance. But I recommend you p2p exchanges, which don't require KYC, e.g. RoboSats or LNP2Pbot.
- nikolay 3y ago
  It's the only exchange without a bad reputation, theft, inside trading, etc.

npoc 3y ago

I offered the Lightning Network as a single example. I don't agree with you, but it's largely irrelevant at this stage. The fact is that Bitcoin is very likely to absorb a vast percentage of the worlds value simply as it is. Once this has happened its value will stabilise and it will become useful as a unit of account/day-to-day currency. By this point, there will be far more motivation to focus on developing solutions (such as Lightning) to allow smaller and faster transactions.

smoldesu 3y ago
> The fact is that Bitcoin is very likely to absorb a vast percentage of the worlds value simply as it is. You present this as a fact, but the actual valuation of Bitcoin doesn't seem to support this claim. John McAfee bet (and proverbially lost) his testicles on broad estimations of Bitcoin's continued growth. Without extraordinary evidence, you can't make claims of extraordinary provenience. > there will be far more motivation to focus on developing solutions (such as Lightning) to allow smaller and faster transactions. If you need an L2 transaction layer to solve an issue inherent to an L1 chain, you're kinda just admitting that the base layer is flawed. Why use Bitcoin at all if we need mediators to settle regular transactions? The "we'll fix it later" mentality works for shitty altcoins that have nothing to lose by reinventing themselves, but I'm not convinced Bitcoin can change. I was mining Bitcoin about a decade ago now, hearing people say "Lightning will work soon" or "a good interchain bridge will exist eventually" in 2024 leaves me convinced nothing has changed. It's a race between the economics and the technology to see which becomes outdated first.
- thinkmassive 3y ago
  > If you need an L2 transaction layer to solve an issue inherent to an L1 chain, you're kinda just admitting that the base layer is flawed. On a similar note, TCP is an admission that IP is flawed. And HTTP is proof that the entire networking stack is a scam. Clearly, any decent networking protocol would handle any and all information interchange anyone could ever need. The fact that HTTP is on its third iteration, and it’s still built in top of the same Internet Protocol from 1974, proves that _nothing_ has changed. /s
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    None of what you said is inherently wrong. Much like the OSI model, if you reinvented Bitcoin today it would look much different. Unlike the OSI model, Bitcoin's solution to finance is not modular or all-encompassing. If it's not going to adapt to modern demands, it will get replaced. There's no point in keeping around a financial solution that is impossible to fix when it breaks.
3y ago