5 ms·

People have been debating the blocksize for a very long time now and there doesn't seem to be any large desire to change it so while the ability to increase it

People have been debating the blocksize for a very long time now and there doesn't seem to be any large desire to change it so while the ability to increase it exists changing anything that fundamental about bitcoin seems to be a non-starter and while that is true lightning is pointless as a solution for the masses. Even if you increase the block size 100x though you're still not improving the numbers much since my very generous numbers ignore activity outside of lightning and assume a single on chain transaction for every user and a perfect network.

littlecranky67 8mo ago
It is not the blocksize. The throughput of transaction on the lightning network is not at all limited by blocksize or the bitcoin blockchain.
- sanswork 8mo ago
  The ability for users to access the lightning network is limited by blocksize since you need transactions to open channels.
  - littlecranky67 8mo ago
    Once channels are open, the users on the lightning network can transact back and forth without any new channel opens/closure and thus no on-chain settlement. Hence: Throughput in lightning is not at all limited on the bitcoin transaction throughput.
    - sanswork 8mo ago
      Throughput depends on users and users are limited by transaction limits is what I'm saying.
  - littlecranky67 8mo ago
    > you need transactions to open channels Maybe your understanding of lightning is wrong here. Yes you open channels, and transactions in lightning need open channels, but you do NOT NEED to open channels for specific transactions. You open channels once, and transact over them for years. I run a lightning node with more than 15 channels (each to different lightning nodes) that are all older than 1 year (I route payments, so I have way more channels than needed). You can batch-open channels, i.e. I could have opened all my 15 channels with a single on-chain transaction. Taproot update would make those "commitment transactions" onchain way smaller (in byte) than needed to in the past.
    - sanswork 8mo ago
      No misunderstanding at all. Go read what I've said again. My timelines are based entirely on each user making a single transaction(opening a single channel).

littlecranky67 8mo ago

It is not the blocksize. The throughput of transaction on the lightning network is not at all limited by blocksize or the bitcoin blockchain.

sanswork 8mo ago
The ability for users to access the lightning network is limited by blocksize since you need transactions to open channels.
- littlecranky67 8mo ago
  Once channels are open, the users on the lightning network can transact back and forth without any new channel opens/closure and thus no on-chain settlement. Hence: Throughput in lightning is not at all limited on the bitcoin transaction throughput.
  - sanswork 8mo ago
    Throughput depends on users and users are limited by transaction limits is what I'm saying.
- littlecranky67 8mo ago
  > you need transactions to open channels Maybe your understanding of lightning is wrong here. Yes you open channels, and transactions in lightning need open channels, but you do NOT NEED to open channels for specific transactions. You open channels once, and transact over them for years. I run a lightning node with more than 15 channels (each to different lightning nodes) that are all older than 1 year (I route payments, so I have way more channels than needed). You can batch-open channels, i.e. I could have opened all my 15 channels with a single on-chain transaction. Taproot update would make those "commitment transactions" onchain way smaller (in byte) than needed to in the past.
  - sanswork 8mo ago
    No misunderstanding at all. Go read what I've said again. My timelines are based entirely on each user making a single transaction(opening a single channel).