LN

bitcoineybitcoiner

I know all about Lightning and I run a node already. But lightning has tradeoffs I don't always like. I'm a big fan of LN but let's not pretend it's ideal - we should always be looking for other ways to scale in parallel.

diradder

LN on BlueWallet has always been custodial by default, but you could use your own node by setting it up manually. Now they are [sunsetting their custodial service](https://bluewallet.io/sunsetting-lndhub/) and you will eventually need your own node if you want to keep using BlueWallet for LN. There are alternatives though, like Phoenix (my preference for now it's non-custodial, you run the LN node on mobile and they handle the channel creations, Loop In and Loop Out if you need to do anything on-chain for a small fee + network fee). Breez or Muun are decent alternatives too.

3utt5lut

No I mean, if you're buying BTC (on exchange), through a funds transfer, you will pay more in fees (withdrawl) and sending (especially if the network is considerably clogged like it has been), just from point A to Point B. A LTC transfer with a swap at the final destination would be significantly cheaper in this regard. This is an alternate route to bypass extensive fees and/or gas, trying to secure your investment on hardware. Of course you could just wait until the network isn't busy or use LN or L2s, but not everyone is as crafty in that sense. I personally want my crypto secured asap, fuck the cost, but if I could save 5% by using an alternate method, it adds up over time. Keep in mind, not everyone has the luxury of having a 1st World currency that can absorb the fees.

eyeoft

Uhh, after an LN payment, the payee HAS the sats. It may not be confirmed on-chain yet but it's irreversible. My reading did not imply that Ark makes that guarantee.

Amber_Sam

Congrats on the move, it's never too late. ONLY INVEST MONEY YOU CAN AFFORD TO LOSE. Invest in your knowledge, learn about Bitcoin as much as you can. The Bitcoin Standard book is a must read. Also, **don't reply any DMs**, promising to buy Bitcoin from them or get rich quick and read this short guide, please: **Price wise, nobody knows what the price will be tomorrow, nor next week.** **Try "Bitcoin ONLY" strategy for at least first year**, you'll sleep much better. Newcomers lose so much money, holding garbage tokens just because someone on YT told them to. Going DCA is probably the best approach, IMHO. Bitcoin to me, is a savings account. If I have some spare cash, I exchange it for SATs. Once a week works best for me, but I'm getting paid weekly. If there's a 10% drop in the price since my last buy, I usually double my buy. This [DCA calculator](https://dcabtc.com/) might help to decide what will work best for you. In a few years, even $10 dollars a month can make a massive difference. Now, don't buy a fake Bitcoin at etoro or similar, get the real thing. Register at a proper exchange and buy real Bitcoin. Any of these will do [https://bitcoin-only.com/get-bitcoin](https://bitcoin-only.com/get-bitcoin) Install (or buy - in case you're getting Bitcoin in Thousands of $) one or more of these wallets. A few good wallet choices: [https://blockstream.com/green/](https://blockstream.com/green/) \- Top Security Features, Open Source and Non-Custodial [https://bluewallet.io](https://bluewallet.io/) \- excellent, easy to use wallet, Open Source and Non-Custodial [https://electrum.org](https://electrum.org/) \- Solid choice, Open Source and Non-Custodial, one of the oldest and most trusted Bitcoin Wallets. Lightning wallets to consider (cheaper and faster transactions, great for very small amounts): [https://phoenix.acinq.co/](https://phoenix.acinq.co/) \- Phoenix [https://blixtwallet.github.io/](https://blixtwallet.github.io/) \- Blixt - rapidly becoming my favourite LN wallet [https://breez.technology](https://breez.technology/) \- Breez - excellent POS for small business owners as well as integrated Bitrefill or LN Pizza Hardware Wallets (to store larger amounts): [https://trezor.io/](https://trezor.io/) \- Easy to use, no matter how new in Bitcoin you're. [https://coldcardwallet.com/](https://coldcardwallet.com/) \- ColdCard is currently the safest and most recommended here. There's also Ledger, but I wouldn't recommend as not fully open source, keep and already leaked customers' details, recently said they're capable or sending customers' keys out just with a firmware update, etc. Stay away. Whatever wallet you'll decide to buy, purchase DIRECTLY from the manufacturer, no eBay, no Amazon. Make sure the device is NOT preset, and you will generate your own seed words. Write them down on any piece of paper as well as the receiving address. Now wipe the wallet and generate a new wallet. If the seed words are different than the first set, you're safe to use it. Find an option to set a passphrase and use it. This will boost the security to another level. Never store the seed words and passphrase together. Use a different medium if possible. If somebody finds both, they'll be able to steal your coin. This little device will hold the keys to your money, that's the reason why you have to be a bit more careful. Also, no worries, if it breaks, you can replace it - as long as you keep your seed words and passphrase(s) safe. Welcome to the rabbit hole and don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions anytime during your Bitcoin journey.

DaVirus

I think that is his point. For LN to give you full benefits, it needs to be available to everyone, not just technical people. I have ran a LN node in the past successfully but it is a pain and a stress.

TheJudgeXD

Confirmations take 5 seconds. Finality takes 10 minutes (a block). Technically LN payments are not final until settled on L1 either, so it's the same thing.

eyeoft

>Users need to wait for on-chain confirmations to consider a payment ‘final’. Found that in the link. As compared to LN that's a severe downside.

garrulous_theory

Because of the current high fee environment, Muun has dropped to second place for this scenario. I have been trying Phoenix, and it seems to fit in seamlessly where Muun was in my example. I don’t think there is any way to associate my identity with a LN destination, but I could be missing something.

Schwacolyte

I wish there was more discussion around this very point. To that end, it would be awesome if there was more participation on the use bitcoins sites. Also, LN makes this more feasible. Just need to figure out how to keep growing participation.

garrulous_theory

Nice find! Thanks for pointing it out. Because it is denominated in USD and not BTC, and the case can be made that I never “disposed of” bitcoin for the transaction, there should be no kyc/tax implications. Also, can the LN destination recorded be linked at all to an individual or company?

garrulous_theory

There was a recent UI change, but I just checked, and there are still only two categories; cash and bitcoin. Paying a LN invoice with your dollar balance shows in cash not bitcoin. Here is an example of me buying meat from my butcher with my dollar balance via a LN invoice from the butcher. This is in the cash column not the bitcoin one: https://i.imgur.com/oogtmy1.jpg Do you have a screenshot where you get different behavior?

zqrt

Nice! Acquiring inbound liquidity is the most beginner unfriendly thing about LN imo. Wonder what trade offs Ark makes.

genjitenji

The world’s billions of people can’t all just suddenly transact on LN if they need to wait hundreds of years to be on-boarded from layer 1 bitcoin. Is this mass adoption?

UnderpaidBIGtime

What's the fee to open a LN channel?

medialAxis

What's the problem? I mean most people who don't get bitcoin also likely don't know what a percentile is, and likely think Python is some sort of snake. Besides, what matters is how fast LN is, and you can only really know that by trying it.

One_2_Three

I had an LN node running with 7 open channels holding 10million sats. I was making about 5-10 sats a day routing payments. You need to have a massive node and be well connected to make real revenue. Even then, you are not covering costs. Also, wait until the mempool empties or wait for the fee rate to drop a bit more. It's a couple of bucks to open a few channels RN. You run an LN node for your own uses, be your own bank. Don't expect to make any money.

IndependentPrimary89

How much money can someone make running a LN node on a raspberry pi? Will it cover at least its electricity cost?

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Bitcoin payment service provider BitPay has integrated Brave Wallet into its payment protocol, allowing crypto wallet users to make payments straight from the privacy browser. Users of Brave Wallet will be able to shop with crypto at thousands of top merchants online and in-store, such as Newegg, APMEX, PacSun, AMC Theatres, and airBaltic. BitPay CEO Stephen Pai said the company had recorded a notable uptick in crypto payments in 2022, with strong interest in accepting crypto payments by major retailers and brands, especially high-end brands, even during market turmoil. The company has processed over $1 million in BTC payments over Lightning since adding support for Bitcoin LN payments in April 2022. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Fbastiat1850

None of my LN transactions were bothered in the least. Nor was my cold storage.

Relai_Alex

Unfortunately, to make Relai the easiest app, they still use a sinlge address. I usually send the sats out to my LN and hardware wallets once in a while, when the fees are low.

reddituserVibez

when i send them through LN my identity is still connected to the sats? when i send them to a lightning wallet and then back to my bitbox, you still can identify where the sats came from and where the gone? or am i missing something?

Bitcoin_Maximalist

you could also mix the coins on joinmarket or send the funds through LN

jxcczpkfby

Strike subreddit is r/LN_strike/ but it's pretty dead there.

Relai_Alex

The r/Relai_app team is working on it day and night - they're locked in the office, getting pizza in through the [letterbox](https://youtu.be/6lMtpAx7sbU). I've been told approximately 21,000,000 times (yes, that's how many times I have already asked the WenLightning question), LN on Relai before the Bitcoin Halving.

clue5tick

Just checked again (I'm fallible). Yup, $299.00 Bitcoin 2024 General Admission. Also checked their payment processor IBEX: "*a bitcoin infrastructure company specialized in Lightning Network (LN) enterprise solutions."* "*IBEXPAY: Accept Bitcoin Lightning Payments, save on fees, and convert to FIAT."* IOW folks, they take your good BTC, and turn it into convieeenient fiat for the corporate community and investment speculators. Yes, I do question their commitment.

Bitcoin_Maximalist

> No LN yet, but SoonTM hurry guys!

bittabet

Can work without them just requires everyone to be online like LN

DesmondNav

Sure but what are you running except for Bitcoin and LN that takes up so much

Halo22B

So your concern is that soon we will be unable to purchase a watch 1/7th as crappy as the one you just bought...on the main chain mind you. And for this we need to all freak out. You then solve your own dillema by mentioning two possible solutions (soft fork and LN) I gotta ask, how much was your TX fee on 1.07?

Relai_Alex

I'm also living in the UK and use Relai.app (shameless plug) since 2020. All you need is an EUR or CHF account - easy and free to accomplish with Revolut. Or use a card with good exchange rates. Relai isn't asking for an ID if the customer buys up to €900, but there's a kind of KYC happening from the details linked to their IBAN. Also, the company set zero fees on the first €100 buys, each month. No LN yet, but SoonTM. Android app, easy to use (my 68 years old neighbor is using it too), the sats go straight to your custody. Seriously, the easiest way to buy and self custody in Europe.

borg_6s

Personally I think it's quite damning that we haven't worked out how to send LN-BTC flawlessly on a desktop (Electrum doesn't always work with that, but mobile has plenty of LN wallets making this a non-issue for it).

Relai_Alex

Thank you, will definitely explore. To be an ASP, does it mean like opening a channel on LN? Any wallets we can test it out?

HappyBear_btc

what's your opinion on this: "Users can unilaterally redeem a virtual utxo for an on-chain utxo without asking for ASP cooperation" it is similar to a LN channel, do you call ⚡a shitcoin as well?

NonTokeableFungin

Do you really see Stablecoins coming onto Bitcoin ? Will there be enough capacity on the chain ? I’m having a really tough time seeing how Bitcoin can be competitive in, say 10-15 yrs. Since Tx Fees will need to be extremely high, compared to any other solution. LN ? - Seems everyone is quite eager to hand over their keys to 3rd parties. Very few actually using LN with *self custody*. Sorta defeats the whole point of crypto, yeah ? And capacity on LN also a grave question.

MichaelAischmann

Have you ever paid a LN invoice with BTC? Easy peasy lemon squeezy & fast af.

rosarino356

ChatGPT is great at ELI5: Imagine you and your friends want to trade toys with each other, but instead of giving each toy individually, you decide to use a special toy-sharing system called the Lightning network. In this network, you all create a shared toy box. Each time you want to trade a toy, you don't have to tell everyone in the group directly. Instead, you write down a note saying which toy you want to give and who should receive it. Now, here's the cool part: you don't have to give the note to every person in the group. You can pass it to a friend who is closer to the person you want to trade with. That friend can pass it on to the next person, and so on, until the note reaches the person who should receive the toy. This way, you can trade toys quickly and easily without having to involve everyone in the group or ask for permission from a central authority. The note acts like a promise, saying that you will give your toy to the person mentioned on the note. When all the trading is done, you can settle everything at once by looking at the notes. If there is a problem or disagreement, you can use the earlier notes as proof to make sure everyone gets the right toys. The Lightning network works similarly with Bitcoin. It allows people to make quick and inexpensive transactions without needing to involve the entire Bitcoin network every time. Instead, they create special payment channels between themselves and use these channels to exchange Bitcoin. These channels act like the shared toy box and the notes in our toy-sharing example. By using the Lightning network, people can make many transactions off the main Bitcoin network, making it faster and more efficient. It's like having a super-fast toy-sharing system for Bitcoin! ​ Here's more info about the LN: [https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-lightning-network](https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/what-is-lightning-network)

solomonsatoshi

Lightning enables mass scale transactions but agree it compromises self custody. Hold your savings Bitcoin and use LN for transactions?

grapthor

>He claims Did he? Did he make that claim, or are other websites making that claim about him, because CoinTelegraph also reported that he was “the first” Presidential candidate to accept Bitcoin donations (didn't mention LN), but didn't attribute it to him as a quote. Not to defend the guy, he ain't getting any money from me, but if this is a claim being falsely made by news sites then they deserve to be called out for shitty reporting and investigation.

SmoothGoing

Misleading. Not the first. And accepts fiat via LN payment processor, not bitcoin.

Dont_Say_No_to_Panda

I said *cash* balances. Strike is trying to get normie customers transferring fiat to fiat (using LN)—a great idea if you ask me—but just saying “NYKNYC” is not going to convert anyone from that space when other methods are backstopped by protections and regulations that mean their money isn’t going to disappear in a collapse or jack mallers boating accident.

bullett007

Bottlepay’s fee is 1%, which ads up over time. Use Kraken Pro and it’s 0.2%, withdraw via LN to Muun for free, then, send to cold storage for as close to 1sat as the mempool will allow.

bittabet

Yes, the neat thing is that you can now use a cash balance to pay LN invoices and they’ll automatically convert and send it and vice versa. So you can hodl BTC and pay USD invoices or hodl USD and pay BTC invoices or have both. A lot of folks don’t quite trust holding BTC so being able to hodl USD will get them into the ecosystem and then when they want to HODL it’ll be a piece of cake.

bullett007

Was thinking the same as you, my DCA flow is buy from Kraken, withdraw to Muun for 0 cost, forward to cold storage for 1sat/vbyte. I have a node, but honestly I don’t want to manage channels and deal with balancing and all that stuff. I’ve tried it a few times and inbound liquidity/no routes to target address is ALWAYS a problem. I bought a Jade HWW recently to try out and it has me curious about L-BTC, but beyond that I haven’t done the research, ideally opening a LN channel to Kraken would solve the problem of getting sats from there to here, but then looping-out sats from the node to cold storage would be another transaction, so then I might as well have withdrawn onchain direct from Kraken which defeats the purpose.

CointestMod

#Nano Con-Arguments Below is a Nano con-argument written by pashtun92. > # A bearish case for Nano: a discussion about bitcoin's scalability and a comparison of Nano with other altcoins. > > Disclaimer: This argument has been used by myself in the last round. I have updated some of the arguments. > > Update: today nano has fallen out of top 200 coin! > > The arguments I have seen in this subreddit are always the same boring arguments: It is fast, free and compared with bitcoin it takes less energy. Nano proponants have entire graphs of electricity use and metaphors to "strenghten" their case. What they forget to mention is that it is exactly this high electricity cost which provides the security of bitcoin. I dare say that bitcoin is the most secured blockchain in the world. Aside from perhaps ethereum, I don't think there is any crypto which has transaction volumes of over billions of USD's. For good reason, mind you. > > Now let's dive deeper into the arguments provided by nano proponants. What I always find interesting, is that nano proponants always claim that bitcoin "is not scalable", knowing full well that this is not the truth. By now, anyone in the space knows of the L2 solution for bitcoin, the lightning network, which does exactly the same as nano does: giving instant and practically free transactions. > > However, when you mention this to a nano proponant, they always come back with the same boring argument: "Ya but there is only 7 TPS in the main chain layer, therefore, L2 is not scalable, as you would need on-chain transactions to open and close LN channels". This is false, I dare say even FUD, as we have something called the lightning channel factories which can scale LN to support the entire world. They are not yet in use, as LN has not reached it's capacity yet. > > The nano proponant proceeds with more FUD: "Ya but LN has many security issues, there is the famous flood & loot attack, you should google it". What the nano proponant either don't know, or as I would expect from them, consciously omit is that we already have a sort of "firewall" for this attack and this problem has been fixed. I suspect consciously because they always claim bitcoin is not scalable when this is obviously false and they know that too. > > So the conclusion we can draw from here is that nano holds no competitive advantage over bitcoin. In contrast, bitcoin DOES hold competitive advantages over nano. For one, the micropayments possible with LN (e.g. paying equivalanet of 0.001 dollar) opens the way to revolutionazing finance and how companies operate. For example, right now all podcast makers have to find "sponsers" to earn money with the podcast. But now it is possible to listen to podcasts through LN, making 0.001 dollar payment per minute, which is nothing for the listener, but can amount to a significant sum for the podcast creator. You could also do something like 'pay for what you watch' as opposed to having a subscription of 10 dollar/month even if you don't use it. > > Aside from this, there are also many other things you can do with LN which I will only briefly touch but link to here: > > It is possible to send messages (app like or email) through LN, completely private and encrypted > > Use atomic multipad payments (AMP) to send FILES through nodes in LN (e.g. an audio file) > > Call someone without anyone ever knowing through LN and even send money over if you wish so > > Decentralised finance (lending & borrowing bitcoin specifically) > > Earn satoshi's through playing games > > We also have important updates coming to the bitcoin network such as Schorr Signatures, RGB and possibly Eltoo. This would make the use of smart contracts very easy on bitcoin and pave the way for DEFI similar to the scale of ETH and others. > > What I find interesting about nano proponant is that they never, NEVER compare nano to other altcoins in their "bull case for nano". Why is this you may ask? The answer is obvious: anyone would immediatly notice that other altcoins can do what nano can and have much better functionality, use cases and backing. All nano can do is transact value from A to B, free and cheap. Let's take a look at a small list of other coins which can do pretty much the same, but also have the potential of DEFI: > > Ethereum (In DEFI, king of security) > > Solana ( In DEFI king of speed) > > Cardano ( In DEFI king of decentralisation) > > XLM > > IOTA > > ALGO > > Yet the nano proponant will claim that nano is undervalued, when it has no competitive advantage whatsoever. Some of them will claim that it is best used for "day to day transactions". Like outlined above, one could easily use LN for that and much more, making nano obsolete. Or if a person was keen on privacy, he or she would use monero for day to day transactions - which is as we all know the king of privacy. > > Nano proponant have a dream that some day it will overtop bitcoin. However, the truth is much harsher. For one, nano used to be a top 10 coin in 2017. Now it temporarily fell out of top 100 just a few months ago. I speculate that this downward trend will continue and nano will drop out of top 100 by the next bull cycle. In my opinion the only reason nano shillers shill this coin is because of personal greed and not fundamentals or use cases. We are living in 2021 and not 2017. We expect more from a coin than just being cheap and fast. > > Tl;dr: Nano has no competitive advantage or whatsover. It is claimed to be fast and cheap, which is true, however the same applies to L2 LN of bitcoin and many other altcoins. Aside from this, LN and other altcoins provide us with many more fuctionalities and use cases, making nano an obsolete coin of 2017. > > Nano spam attack: Because of its non-existant fees, it makes the network susceptible to a Sybil attack. Not mentioned in my original post, but add security risk to another con of nano network. This is proof to me that nano would never function as a global reserve currency. Link: Nano’s Network Flooded With Spam, Nodes Out of Sync (coindesk.com) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Nano) to find submissions for other topics.

trashcleaner

It could be a LN withdrawal coupon. Similar to what you can create on LNbits. Basically a QR code which you scan with your lightning wallet and then you receive the amount.

Relai_Alex

The Relai_app team is working on it day and night - they're locked in the office, getting pizza in through the [letterbox](https://youtu.be/6lMtpAx7sbU). I've been told 21,000,000 times (yes, that's how many times I have already asked the WenLightning question), LN on Relai before the next Bitcoin Halving.

Bitcoin_Maximalist

why should people not point out LN? x-D

QuestionTheeElite

The following opinion is strictly an opinion and should not be misinterpreted as financial or investment advice. The accuracy of this information can not be guaranteed. However, I hope it encourages you to do some research. Mods, before you consider removing this post, please reference this Wikipedia article Bitcoin Scalability Problem and remember you have an obligation to allow others to hear opinions, even if they are unpopular. Anyways, I recently did some research on BTC and developed the unpopular opinion that BTC’s scalability problem is shocking and those that believe it is the “golden standard” of cryptocurrency should learn a lot more about BTC’s problems. BTC has a major scaling problem. BTC can only process between 3-7 transactions per second for each block that gets created (one block gets created every 10 minutes) here are some calculations for what that means: Worst case scenario: 3 transactions / second * 60 seconds / minute * 10 minutes = processing 1,800 transactions per block (one BTC block is created every 10 minutes). Best case scenario: 7 transactions / second * 60 seconds/ minute * 10 minutes = processing 4,200 transactions per block (one BTC block is created every 10 minutes). If your transaction doesn’t get processed, the blockchain gets backed up and can take your transaction up to 14 days to timeout and fail or possibly succeed. Once you send BTC, you can’t cancel it. You have to wait for the BTC transaction to either timeout/fail or succeed. Worst case scenario (3 transactions per second) is just as likely as the best case scenario above for on-chain transaction processing since the Segwit, Taproot, and Oridinals further limit transaction processing capabilities for each BTC block. Why limit BTC transactions? One reason is mining BTC is expensive, which ultimately minimizes access to BTC’s network and can drive up fees and increase profits overtime. This is how you see someone recently choosing to pay 15k in fees to move 3.4 BTC not long ago. Ultimately, they decided to do that, but BTC has changed a lot since the project was created and Satoshi published the Bitcoin white paper. Lightning Network (LN) does not necessarily solve BTC’s scalability problem as the LN is still considered experimental. That means there is no one to call or talk to about getting your BTC back if a LN bug causes the transaction to fail, a channel closes while the BTC is in transit, or any other reason the BTC is not received. Again, Lightning Network is still experimental. After learning this, I feel like relying on Lightning Network is almost as risky as keeping your BTC on a centralized exchange (CEX). That is risky too because centralized exchanges can fail at anytime and the customers rarely get everything they are owed back (FTX, Voyager, and Mt Gox). If you still like BTC, great! Please do not ask the governments or everyday citizens for help or a bailout. This is a sober reminder that cryptocurrency is risky. Again, this is not financial or investment advice. The reason I’m posting about this limitation is because I recently learned about it and BTC holders need to remember the blockchain has very real limitations related to processing transactions.

encryptzee

Just set up my first LN wallet, Wallet of Satoshi. I'm trying to send sats from kraken but I can't find the LN-URL required by the exchange. WoS only shows an LN email address which the exchange doesn't recognize as a valid LN address. Am I missing something?

Bitcoin_Maximalist

many of these sites are scams. use Joinmarket and try to use LN as much as possible

RockyMountain_Jeeper

What else could you say? I mean, if you knew anything about LN or BTC you'd come back with actual points. But alas. Not.

RockyMountain_Jeeper

LN is literally not that. It IS one of the bigger threats to BTC in that it amplifies centralization. I don't even believe they've solved routing yet so at some point we'll see one or two huge assed hubs that nearly all payments will route through out of sheer need to do so. You can't have BTC on L2 if L1 is captured and neutered.

Jankylad

> And what's the problem? Bitcoin could be mined with two raspberry pis if the rest of the miners don't consider it economically viable, the past of the chain won't be able to vi modified, the work has already been put on it. The problem is that the network wouldn't be secure if it was mined with two raspberry pis. Anyone with some resources could take control over the network or attack it. >My channels have been there for a year now and they work like a charm on LN, there's time to add liquidity to a liquidity network, your prediction of "it won't scale" will become truth sooner or later, but when it does another solution would have been found already. Dude the fees have been as high as 70 USD back in 2017 and recently they were 30 USD. All from relatively small pushes in activity. That's the network not being able to scale already. We're not talking in hypotheticals. The BTC chain has proven multiple times that it can't handle activity. You guys keep saying the problems will be solved in the future, because you're cultists trying to sell an idea. >You can either stay on that position that Bitcoin will never scale and nobody will ever use it, or you can simply use it and stop caring if it scales or not because the most important property of Bitcoin is not being a payments network but a solid monetary base. It's not a solid monetary base though. The amount of users who can use it are laughable and they're forced to trust exchanges and centralised solutions because the network can't handle real activity. That's not a solid monetary base if we're talking anything outside of a super niche internet funny money meme.

jk_14r

because Binace is Cancer They simply prefer to earn big bucks at the expense of Bitcoin and Lightning Network adoption, whole story. Bitfinex implemented LN support in September 2020... Ceterum Censeo: Binance is Cancer.

fverdeja

And what's the problem? Bitcoin could be mined with two raspberry pis if the rest of the miners don't consider it economically viable, the past of the chain won't be able to vi modified, the work has already been put on it. The really important thing here is that Bitcoin is simply better money, not how you interact with it, I use LN, yes, some people use Liquid, others use RSK, others use custodial solutions, the decentralization is to make the economic policy work and avoid central planing (thing that doesn't happen in crypto, they are "decentralized" but somebody decides what it will be in the future) and not needing to trust it, people can chose their own level of risk, and yes, LN needs a transaction to open a channel and another to close it, but that's why batching exists, that why people run LN node instead of opening and closing channels every time they need a new pair. My channels have been there for a year now and they work like a charm on LN, there's time to add liquidity to a liquidity network, your prediction of "it won't scale" will become truth sooner or later, but when it does another solution would have been found already. You can either stay on that position that Bitcoin will never scale and nobody will ever use it, or you can simply use it and stop caring if it scales or not because the most important property of Bitcoin is not being a payments network but a solid monetary base.

Jankylad

I mean it is a bad solution for scaling Bitcoin since it doesn't work at a scale. Splicing still requires on-chain transactions. It will inevitably push people towards centralisation since Bitcoin is so insanely inefficient it can't handle more than a few hundred thousand transactions per day and that includes opening and closing channels, something LN relies on. The fact that you guys have to keep throwing out potential future solutions like channel factories shows the deep flaws. Especially when these solutions don't work at a scale either. That's why most serious proponents of a scaled Bitcoin reality starts talking about or hinting towards centralised platforms using BTC as a base layer and don't expect regular people to ever interact with the L1. Because how could they if you also expect more than a few million users? Every block contains the same amount of data as a mp3 file of a song at most, it cannot scale for mass adoption without giving up decentralisation. And if it's somehow possible in a theoretical future to avoid the main layer fully while still using BTC decentralised, guess what? You just removed the incentive for miners to keep mining, because why would anyone pay transaction fees using the base layer if they can avoid it with no negative consequences? You can't have both. Either L2 solutions are flawed or the whole mining scheme collapses once the coinbase rewards are gone.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Bitcoin Lightning Network (LN) developer Lightning Labs has announced Taproot Assets v0.2 to alleviate network congestion. Bitcoin Lightning Network (LN) developer Lightning Labs has announced Taproot Assets v0.2 to alleviate network congestion. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

fverdeja

Right now that's true, and you are right, there's a certain number of drawbacks for when using LN, it doesn't mean that it's a bad solution for scaling Bitcoin. For most of the problems you mention I think splicing will be a good solution, I'm looking up for it.

R4ID

using the XRPL to send bitcoin faster, cheaper and more securely than LN. Yikes https://twitter.com/sentosumosaba/status/1657959175601938434

CointestMod

#Nano Con-Arguments Below is a Nano con-argument written by pashtun92. > # A bearish case for Nano: a discussion about bitcoin's scalability and a comparison of Nano with other altcoins. > > Disclaimer: This argument has been used by myself in the last round. I have updated some of the arguments. > > Update: today nano has fallen out of top 200 coin! > > The arguments I have seen in this subreddit are always the same boring arguments: It is fast, free and compared with bitcoin it takes less energy. Nano proponants have entire graphs of electricity use and metaphors to "strenghten" their case. What they forget to mention is that it is exactly this high electricity cost which provides the security of bitcoin. I dare say that bitcoin is the most secured blockchain in the world. Aside from perhaps ethereum, I don't think there is any crypto which has transaction volumes of over billions of USD's. For good reason, mind you. > > Now let's dive deeper into the arguments provided by nano proponants. What I always find interesting, is that nano proponants always claim that bitcoin "is not scalable", knowing full well that this is not the truth. By now, anyone in the space knows of the L2 solution for bitcoin, the lightning network, which does exactly the same as nano does: giving instant and practically free transactions. > > However, when you mention this to a nano proponant, they always come back with the same boring argument: "Ya but there is only 7 TPS in the main chain layer, therefore, L2 is not scalable, as you would need on-chain transactions to open and close LN channels". This is false, I dare say even FUD, as we have something called the lightning channel factories which can scale LN to support the entire world. They are not yet in use, as LN has not reached it's capacity yet. > > The nano proponant proceeds with more FUD: "Ya but LN has many security issues, there is the famous flood & loot attack, you should google it". What the nano proponant either don't know, or as I would expect from them, consciously omit is that we already have a sort of "firewall" for this attack and this problem has been fixed. I suspect consciously because they always claim bitcoin is not scalable when this is obviously false and they know that too. > > So the conclusion we can draw from here is that nano holds no competitive advantage over bitcoin. In contrast, bitcoin DOES hold competitive advantages over nano. For one, the micropayments possible with LN (e.g. paying equivalanet of 0.001 dollar) opens the way to revolutionazing finance and how companies operate. For example, right now all podcast makers have to find "sponsers" to earn money with the podcast. But now it is possible to listen to podcasts through LN, making 0.001 dollar payment per minute, which is nothing for the listener, but can amount to a significant sum for the podcast creator. You could also do something like 'pay for what you watch' as opposed to having a subscription of 10 dollar/month even if you don't use it. > > Aside from this, there are also many other things you can do with LN which I will only briefly touch but link to here: > > It is possible to send messages (app like or email) through LN, completely private and encrypted > > Use atomic multipad payments (AMP) to send FILES through nodes in LN (e.g. an audio file) > > Call someone without anyone ever knowing through LN and even send money over if you wish so > > Decentralised finance (lending & borrowing bitcoin specifically) > > Earn satoshi's through playing games > > We also have important updates coming to the bitcoin network such as Schorr Signatures, RGB and possibly Eltoo. This would make the use of smart contracts very easy on bitcoin and pave the way for DEFI similar to the scale of ETH and others. > > What I find interesting about nano proponant is that they never, NEVER compare nano to other altcoins in their "bull case for nano". Why is this you may ask? The answer is obvious: anyone would immediatly notice that other altcoins can do what nano can and have much better functionality, use cases and backing. All nano can do is transact value from A to B, free and cheap. Let's take a look at a small list of other coins which can do pretty much the same, but also have the potential of DEFI: > > Ethereum (In DEFI, king of security) > > Solana ( In DEFI king of speed) > > Cardano ( In DEFI king of decentralisation) > > XLM > > IOTA > > ALGO > > Yet the nano proponant will claim that nano is undervalued, when it has no competitive advantage whatsoever. Some of them will claim that it is best used for "day to day transactions". Like outlined above, one could easily use LN for that and much more, making nano obsolete. Or if a person was keen on privacy, he or she would use monero for day to day transactions - which is as we all know the king of privacy. > > Nano proponant have a dream that some day it will overtop bitcoin. However, the truth is much harsher. For one, nano used to be a top 10 coin in 2017. Now it temporarily fell out of top 100 just a few months ago. I speculate that this downward trend will continue and nano will drop out of top 100 by the next bull cycle. In my opinion the only reason nano shillers shill this coin is because of personal greed and not fundamentals or use cases. We are living in 2021 and not 2017. We expect more from a coin than just being cheap and fast. > > Tl;dr: Nano has no competitive advantage or whatsover. It is claimed to be fast and cheap, which is true, however the same applies to L2 LN of bitcoin and many other altcoins. Aside from this, LN and other altcoins provide us with many more fuctionalities and use cases, making nano an obsolete coin of 2017. > > Nano spam attack: Because of its non-existant fees, it makes the network susceptible to a Sybil attack. Not mentioned in my original post, but add security risk to another con of nano network. This is proof to me that nano would never function as a global reserve currency. Link: Nano’s Network Flooded With Spam, Nodes Out of Sync (coindesk.com) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Nano) to find submissions for other topics.

Corbimos

I've pegged into liquid and done a swap with my bad bank. You can also open up lightning channels, and send all funds to another node you control. LN is onion routed by default. Be careful waiting and combining those bad bank UTXOs. Because now you link all the previous transactions, and therefore, mixes together so someone can build a more accurate profile on your no KYC stack. I think others have swapped for privacy shitcoins. There's not really a perfect way to handle it atm. Once we have signature aggregation, coin joins will become much easier.

ArtByJa3son

I made this for a client, they plan on accepting LN payments for their business, and wanted a custom gif of 750px by 750px with transparency to place on their website.

fan_of_hakiksexydays

I've been spending crypto on almost everything...when I was paid in crypto. The problem really stems from not being paid in crypto. More so than not having enough places to spend it (most people don't realize they can spend it on a lot more things), or that it's to hard to use (biggest bullshit argument), or that it's too volatile (fair enough, but in practice it's not as bad as people make it out to be). I've used my crypto to buy groceries at Whole Foods, order most of the stuff I need online, and even pay some of my bills. And I usually used XLM, which was instantaneous and cost $0.0001. I could have used Bitcoin on LN for just $0.04. But the second I stopped getting paid in crypto, I started to get rid of my least valuable currency first: fiat. Fiat is toilet paper and won't make me money, and it's a debt system with strings attached. So of course I'm gonna get rid of that first, and use last my real money, with real ownership, that has more utility and value .

Zatouroffski

Ok so, tried direct pay from the game to Muun and muun screen says "lightning.thndr.io is taking too long to pay". After a reddit search, found this comment: "Muun is not a lightning wallet. It's a Bitcoin only wallet that does submarine swaps to pay lightning invoices. Lightning payments received by them on your behalf, are paid to you as an on-chain transaction, which, as you know, can take hours. You can't receive a lightning payment directly with Muun.". Not sure how you got a transaction, maybe your payment was high enough to create a channel. Then I found Phoenix wallet, which is a non-custodial wallet again, gives you your 12 word seed + it claims full support of LN. To recieve a payment, it asks me to receive a payment for at least 10.000 sat for the first time to create a LN channel. It also appeared in wallet list in game withdraw menu after I've installed it. I don't hold BTC, probably I'll just convert some and send it from my exchange. LN thing feels really weird after getting busy with ETH L1+L2 solutions :D

Zatouroffski

Currently WofS gives "payment failed, there was a problem routing this payment on the lightning network" error when I try to withdraw it to Muun LN invoice but it was 160 sats anyway, I can continue withdrawing my balance directly into Muun next time. Thanks again.

Zatouroffski

Thanks for the reply. Do you know how much does it cost to send a transaction from WofS to Muun? I can calculate current required mainnet fees from my mind with current sat/b but I've never used LN.

Ropster86

Yup. Completely true. That's why I use Muun because I can receive through LN and send it to my Ledger through SegWit (lets you adjust network fees). Some games allowed only Wallet of Satoshi so I sent sats from WofS to Muun if I couldn't mke them to send me tokens directly to Muun. Or... You can just use LN as a payment for whatever it may be accepted

Giga79

>ZKs will be way to computationally heavy for BTC i'd assume. Would just clog up the network even more. not a good idea imo. The computational cost to generate is the responsibility of the user, but this allowing us to scale BTC using our own networks. The fact ZK proofs can later be put on-chain without *any* additional trust assumptions is the breakthrough in the tech. It is orders of magnitude faster/easier to validate a ZK proof than to generate one. An ideal use case is L2-scaling. Users pay fees into the ZK-chain and that pays miners on L1 as it continously uploads proofs. The more congested a ZK-chain is, the more people splitting 1 network fee so the cheaper L2 individual fees become - despite the L1 network fee growing (sustainably) large in line with all other demand. Lightning Network is off-chain entirely and does not contribute to the security model so is not a viable endgame scaling solution. Another ideal use case is privacy. You send BTC to a ZK-address, now your BTC isn't associated with your original wallet. The problem with mixers is you give your coins to North Korea and take some from Russia, but using ZK means you will get only your coins back, this form of anonymity/privacy is legal as of today (eg Monero). A ZK-chain would enable near-free private *payments* while contributing to the security model that BTC's halvings (without high fees) put into question. It is the best opportunity I've seen emerge for Bitcoin to follow its own whitepaper. Vitalik said something like *ZK tech is as big of an invention as DLT itself*. It will only become more optimized over time as people discover better ways to utilize it. Proofs can be as little as 100kb and represent 1000s of individual transactions with *richness*, ie smart contracts/complexity. A typical BTC transaction with 6 inputs and 2 outputs is ~1.2kb. You could enable Ethereum-like (Turing complete) complexity, privacy, and scale BTC by over 10x without any optimizations at all, without increasing miner requirements. Consider most BTC in circulation today is wBTC on Ethereum secured by a multisig. 0.005% of BTC are using LN. Bitcoin needs to do something to scale on-chain because there's no way to use the network today when fees get high. BTC fees are meant to get *much* higher and stay high indefinitely as per its whitepaper and halving cycles, this is an insurmountable problem without ZK.

Halo22B

Their twitter page specifically says they are experiencing intermittent issues on LN

MoneroArbo

LN was integrated into LTC forever ago, this is extremely old news

CointestMod

#Lightning Network Con-Arguments Below is a Lightning Network con-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Lightning Network and why is it needed? > > Lightning Network is a layer 2 protocol (just like e.g. Optimistic Rollups are layer 2 solutions for ETH) designed to solve scalability problem. Scalability, to put it simply, is how many transactions per second (TPS) can be performed. As of now, Bitcoin is not scalable, meaning it can perform very few transactions compared not only to PayPal or Visa, but also to many other cryptocurrencies. This results in high fees and delayed transactions. Lightning Network is supposed to solve Bitcoin’s scalability problem. > > # What are Lightning Network’s cons? > > Lightning Network does not really solve the scalability problem > > The main downside of Lightning Network is the fact that it does not solve the problem it is supposed to solve. In order to use LN, you have to set up (fund) a payment channel and to do that, you have to make an on-chain transaction. Then you can make as many transactions on LN as you want but there are several problems: > > 1) Bitcoin’s (and other cryptocurrencies') **volatility** – due to fluctuations in BTCs price, most people do not hold their Bitcoins for too long in payment channels on LN. Most people move them back and forth. This means that there are still many transactions made on the blockchain since the opening and closing of payment channel takes place on the blockchain. > > Rakes Sharma from Investopedia gives another example of problems associated with Bitcoin’s volatility and the use of LN: > > *For example, let's say a company has to pay an invoice to their supplier of bitcoin. Typically, suppliers give their clients time to pay, such as 30 days. If bitcoin's price has increased by 10% during the 30 day period, the business has to come up with another 10% worth of fiat currency or another cryptocurrency to convert to Bitcoin and pay the invoice to pay the supplier. This exchange risk exists because the business might be paid by their customers in a fiat currency and not Bitcoin. The exchange risk also exists for consumer transactions since the salary or wages for most individuals are not paid in Bitcoin, leading to transactions being converted from a fiat currency to Bitcoin.* > > 2) **No incentive to keep your BTC on LN** – the transactions on LN are very cheap, therefore the commissions you make by serving as a node (intermediary in transactions between agents who do not have direct connection) are also very low. > > 3) **Nodes are required to stay online** – to make and validate transactions on LN, you have to use your private key. This is not only inconvenient but also puts the user at risk of his/her device (on which the private keys are stored) being exposed. > > 4) **Going offline poses a risk** – nodes are required to stay online probably because going offline may cause a lot of problems. If one of the participants of a payment channel decides to close it while the other one is absent, this user might successfully steal the amount of BTC held on that channel if the other participant does not react in time. > > 5) The above also makes **malicious attacks on the network** possible – someone might create multiple channels and close them all at once, creating a huge congestion since closing a channel is an on-chain transaction. This congestion, in turn, would make it impossible for other participants of those channels to react in time and withdraw their funds. > > 6) Although transactions made on LN are not public, nodes can see who they received the payment from and who they passed the payment to. There are also “watchtower” nodes that can monitor the whole network for fraud. This combined with inconveniences of maintaining a node as a regular user, **might make LN centralized**: big players will be happy to maintain multiple nodes 24/7 even if it isn't that profitable in exchange for the information on transactions that people make. They would also be able to put a lot of funds on their payment channels making them more practical (the transaction amount on LN is limited by the amount of BTC held in payment channels/nodes - see point 8). > > 7) It has been years since LN was completed (2017) and **it still is not popular** among the great majority of Bitcoin holders. As of now, not even 0.5% of BTC is “locked” on LN. And if the network is not used, it will never solve the scalability problem. > > 8) Payment channels need to have an equal or larger amount of BTC from that being send by someone. And since sometimes the payment has to go through several payment channels, **it makes large transactions very complicated**. If someone wanted to send e.g. 1 BTC, each payment channel that this transaction would go through has to hold at least 1 BTC. > > 9) Another problem with transactions going via multiple payment channels/nodes is the fact that **each node takes a commission**. So it might turn out that some transactions are not really that cheap. > > 10) Bugs in the code are still being found today and some people say that LN should still be in a testing phase. > > ^(Sources:) > > ^(https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf) > > ^(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning\\Network) > > ^(https://www.investopedia.com/tech/bitcoin-lightning-network-problems/) > > ^(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3cQNpOR\\a0) > > ^(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCSfoiD8wUA) > > ^(https://www.reuters.com/business/el-salvadors-bitcoin-beach-town-digital-divide-slows-uptake-2021-06-14/) > > ^(https://www.wired.com/story/the-lightning-network-could-make-bitcoin-faster-and-cheaper/) > > ^(https://cointelegraph.com/lightning-network-101/altcoins-with-lightning-network-support) > > ^(https://blockchainsimplified.com/blog/bitcoin-lightning-network-vs-ethereum-plasma/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Lightning_Network) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Lightning Network Pro-Arguments Below is a Lightning Network pro-argument written by Blendzi0r. > # What is Lightning Network and why is it needed? > > Lightning Network is a layer 2 protocol (just like e.g. Optimistic Rollups are layer 2 solutions for ETH) designed to solve scalability problem. Scalability, to put it simply, is how many transactions per second (TPS) can be performed. As of now, Bitcoin is not scalable, meaning it can perform very few transactions compared not only to PayPal or Visa, but also to many other cryptocurrencies. This results in congestion - high fees and delayed transactions. Lightning Network is to solve Bitcoin’s scalability problem. > > > # What are Lightning Network's pros? > > **It's Fast** > > As mentioned in the introduction, Lightning Network helps Bitcoin perform more TPS. In order to use LN, users have to set up (fund) a **payment channel**/node. After setting up the channel, all direct transactions made with someone who also set up a payment channel are free and fast – the speed of transactions depends on the internet speed of users. Theoretically, there are no limits as to the number of payments that can be made per second. > > **It's Cheap** > > It is important to note that it is possible to make transactions with people with whom you do not have payment channels set up. This is what the “Network” part of the name stands for. If you do not have a direct payment channel set up with someone you want to transact with, you can make this transaction via other people (nodes) who have such a connection (it is called **payment routing**). This is when you will also have to pay a very small fee to each node that the transaction goes through. LN always searches for the shortest route to reach the receiver of your payment but those **commissions are insignificant** anyway. > > This is even less of an issue when you take into consideration that **you can make an infinite number of transactions between payment channels on LN** and, therefore, avoid current high fees on Bitcoin blockchain. > > **It's Private** > > Except two transactions: opening (funding) a payment channel and closing it, all **transactions made between LN users are not recorded on the blockchain**. They are not public. On top of that, LN uses onion routing known from Tor (The Onion Router). > > The only agents that can see transaction made on Lightning Network are those who participate in them (they can see who they received the payment from and who they sent the payment to) > > **It's Secure** > > Lightning Network uses a technology called HTLC – **Hashed Timelock Contract**. It is a smart contract that eliminates the counterparty risk as it facilitates time-bound transactions. Put simply, it means that people have to accept payments by providing cryptographic proof in a given time. > > There are also Watchtower nodes - third parties whose job is to prevent fraud within Lightning Network. If anything goes wrong during a transaction, e.g. one of the parties goes offline or commits a malicious act, the funds are returned to the other party (funds are safu) > > **Reduces the load on Bitcoin’s blockchain** > > Since all the transactions between payment channels on Lightning Network are performed off-chain, it reduces the load on Bitcoin’s blockchain. This mean that transactions even for people who will not use LN might become much cheaper and much faster if enough people use LN. > > **Does not require a fork** > > As a layer 2 protocol, Lightning Network does not require any forking, so **there is no risk of a hard fork** (hard fork divides blockchains into two separate blockchains/currencies. This is how e.g. Bitcoin Cash was created). All the transactions are performed off-chain, so the Bitcoin block size does not have to be changed. > > **It made it possible for Bitcoin to become a legal tender in El Salvador** > > Lightning Network was tested in El Salvadoran beach town of El Zonte. Despite terrible internet connection and other technological limitations in the town, 90% of families in El Zonte made Bitcoin transactions using LN and the success of this experiment encouraged the president of El Salvador to make Bitcoin legal tender in his country. On September 7, El Salvador became the first country in the world to embrace Bitcoin as legal tender thanks to LN. > > **Endorsed by Jack Dorsey, Twitter CEO** > > Lightning Network was completed in 2017 and its adoption process was rather slow. However, the situation changed around 2020. More and more parties are adopting LN, including crypto exchanges. Jack Dorsey is known to be a great enthusiast of LN. He donated money to the Lighting Labs, developers of software that powers LN. He also makes it clear that he wants Twitter to integrate LN. > > **Lightning Network is not only for Bitcoin** > > Lightning Network can be used with virtually any other cryptocurrency. Altcoins that use or used LN include e.g. Litecoin (cheaper transactions were always Litecoin’s advantage over BTC, but if BTC adopts LN, this advantage will disappear), ZCash, XRP, Monero or Stellar. > > The key-takeaway is that **Lightning Network makes it possible for Bitcoin to become an actual currency** and not only a store of value. And this is what Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin’s creator, envisioned. > > ^(Sources:) > > ^(https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf) > > ^(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning\\Network) > > ^(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3cQNpOR\\a0) > > ^(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCSfoiD8wUA) > > ^(https://www.reuters.com/business/el-salvadors-bitcoin-beach-town-digital-divide-slows-uptake-2021-06-14/) > > ^(https://www.wired.com/story/the-lightning-network-could-make-bitcoin-faster-and-cheaper/) > > ^(https://cointelegraph.com/lightning-network-101/altcoins-with-lightning-network-support) > > ^(https://blockchainsimplified.com/blog/bitcoin-lightning-network-vs-ethereum-plasma/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Lightning_Network) to find submissions for other topics.

Halo22B

No.....you've never "sold" meaning you receive only therefore you have never been concerned with TX fees in the past. What about now?. Do you have a pressing reason to send a TX right now? If not wait till fees drop lower. If you do do you have a low cost TX (single input, no extra data) that will cover the TX? Use that one and don't worry about consolidating other UTXOs How about future proofing? You have a bunch of 10k Sat UTXOs (from some crazy hourly DCA plan?) Yes some of these should be consolidated into cheaper TXs. But which ones? As I've mentioned before treat UTXOs like fiat cash bills have some 5s but also 20's and hundreds. (So 50k, 100k, 250k, 500k and 1m) But again you can wait until a low fee environment returns. Also explore LN for cheap small TXs

skeuo

I have $10 in BTC, i want to send it to a friend using LN so it is cheap and fast. I have never set up a LN wallet before and want to send it in a self-custodial way because $10 is still a lot of money where i live and i don't trust centralized services. How much roughly will this cost and how quickly will it take?

Ropster86

It's not a staking service. He meant stacked. It's a custodial wallet for the lightning network. He just played and won a prize or gathered many prizes. Thndr games is a platform with around 5 games, so you play the ones you like and you get ticket for a raffle which happens everyday and you get a prize between 5 to 1000 (?) satoshi. You an stack prizes until you want to withdraw to a LN wallet (before three days after each prize or it'll be gone). I used to play a lot but ended losing interest.

shreveportfixit

Transactions are confirmed on LN though. Fraud and double spending are still impossible.

3utt5lut

The main I'm using Kraken now is because of LN. But it's only for onramping BTC for alts. The cheaper the better.

Halo22B

There is no one "perfect" size....think about it like fiat paper bills. You want some ones, fives, tens, twenties and hundos. Use LN for the small stuff and then have a few 50kS, a few 100kS, some 250kS etc etc

LayPessimist

I love Bitcoiners who like to pretend we can already fully live on an LN standard. Lol. If I transfer from my cold storage to LN I still incur high fees. I might pretend I don’t see it, but it is a fact. And you don’t keep your whole stack on LN. So you will incur multiple on-chain transactions.

18476

Well, since nobody else said it, I'll reiterate. " Payments over lightning are not effected." Should this not promote the LN? Beuller?

Additional-Koala-672

Was gonna reply, ‘Nostr’ until I saw your last sentence. I’ve seen people do business on there. Must’ve worked out for them. Just post a ‘note’ for your good or service and tell people to DM you for their shipping details. Send them a LN invoice (be sure to put all the details of the sale in your memo line). Once they pay, ship it. This may or may not be advice from personal experience lol 🤫

Additional-Koala-672

Yaaaaa I’m in agreement here. Not ‘selling’ unless it’s to a LN address for goods or services, waaaay down the road.

MichaelAischmann

For the little BTC I have in my LN wallet, I would spend it on the first opportunity I find, whether online or in real life, as long as it is something I actually need/want. I'm not looking "Where can I spend my Sats." I'm hoping to stumble upon an opportunity to use them. Ideally I'd like my first purchase to be 2 pizzas for 10,000 Satoshi. :D

nyaaaa

Its not an ATM if its not automated or usable. This is just a empty your LN wallet device.

Giga79

>Saito's soliton if I remember it correctly, If I am let's say running network of nodes and someone else is running a network of nodes too. Client A wants to send trx to B and he has two ways me or the other guy he will see which route is smaller so that he can pay less. Won't that centralize itself around the biggest/most centralized nodes? If AWS creates a node network it will be cheaper to use that for all routing than any small decentralized node, quickly decentralized nodes(aka *votes*) become a minority and rendered moot in that network. Wouldn't this also grossly benefit economies of scale eg node inequality? If Client B is AWS they will collect all rewards while you operate your node at a loss. I guess it depends on how consequencial these nodes are, is their work *additive* (a bonus) or necessary for the network? That is the issue with Lightning Network anyway. Eventually everyone ends up using the same/largest ~*1* hub to route their LN connection because it will always be cheaper than using a smaller or decentralized hub. It's unfortunately ironic that *banks* are the most likely candidate for becoming that ~1 hub if LN ever takes off. I would suppose already powerful centralized payment networks like Visa/Paypal/banks would be the main routers on a network like Saito - unless I'm misunderstanding its mechanism, if not I don't see how that is an upgrade or more decentralized.

zergtoshi

Thank you explaining it in great detail how it works. Yet there are some things I do not understand. >You aren't using Phoenix's utxo. Well, it is their utxo, but only after you send it to them (point being, it's not a shared utxo, like some other solutions use). The app on your phone is a lightning node that only you control. doesn't seem to match >Why don't you let me set the feerate myself when sending on-chain? >Swaps are so tightly integrated in Phoenix that you may believe that you are spending from your own wallet, but that's not the case. You are actually spending from our UTXO set, which we have to share among users. That is why we can't let users set their own feerate. source: [https://phoenix.acinq.co/faq#why-dont-you-let-me-set-the-feerate-myself-when-sending-on-chain](https://phoenix.acinq.co/faq#why-dont-you-let-me-set-the-feerate-myself-when-sending-on-chain) If the app on my phone is a LN node that I control, why can't I adjust fees? I imagined using Phoenix (without opening own channels) similar to going to a casino. If you want to play in a casino, you have to exchange money chips. That allows you to use the casino's services and once you're done, you can exchange the chips back to money. My understanding was that using Phoenix without opening your own channels requires swaps: you swap BTC, by sending them BTC and therefore you get an equivalent amount that can be used through Phoenix' channels. Is that completely off? That's why I thought, you'd lose funds in case Phoenix goes belly up. I mean, who'd want to exchange chips from a different casino, that no longer exists? >If they disappeared tomorrow, you would be unable to send lightning payments, but your funds are recoverable to a base layer address. Where and how can I recover swapped Phoenix funds to a base layer address? Do you perchance have a link, which explains it?

cndvcndv

Yes, Bitcoin can't and shouldn't scale on the first layer so either LN or another L2 will be the future.

Most_Being_4002

Can you tell me in short?its possible use LN to send BTC to ledger (i know they doesnt support LN for now) for self custody or your everytime must pay tx fees?i mean theoretically.is this possible?.thanks

Dwaas_Bjaas

Maybe Ordinals will finally boost LN development (ease of use) and adoption

Corbimos

Use the Bitcoin company app. It does what strike said they'd do. Send LN or On-chain BTC and get a visa debit card for any amount. And no KYC. Couldn't ask for a better product.

iworkisleep

Can’t you use LN channel? I think Binance recently enabled it

Umpire_State_Bldg

Think of it like a checking account. You don't open a new checking account every time you spend money from it. You open it once. You have your pay deposited into it. You write checks, you use your debit card, you pay for things on-line from your checking account. Someday, you'll create a Lightning Network channel with some Bitcoin. You'll get paid via your LN channel. You'll pay your bills and buy stuff using your LN channel.

Jankylad

Okay so at most you can obtain a few hundred bucks before having to open a new channel? Meaning you can't use it to obtain a salary, obviously can't use it to save, can't use it for larger purchases such as rent etc. I know that's not the purpose you have for using LN, because otherwise I assume you'd have a larger channel. Though, good luck with using it for these purposes anyways considering you'd have to find liquidity in other channels. But then realise these are things regular people have to do monthly or even bi-weekly. Meaning they'd be forced to use the extremely inefficient and slow L1 that can't handle any real traffic. And if they want to open a LN channel they would have to pay large fees which would only grow larger with the userbase. And then having to risk a salary/rent payment at least in a channel they'd have to monitor to make sure it's not stolen.

VeludoVeludo

Sounds like they're only really doing it since Bitcoin transactions and holdings have been about halved recently. Good development nonetheless to have a big CEX, other than Kraken, support LN.

Halo22B

Your gonna send 3$ and it will cost you 4$ in TX fees. Keep it as LN....you normally keep 6$ in your LN wallet it's not a hard stretch to keep 9$ there

Bee-Tea-Sea

wow! I didn't think running an LN node could make this many sats thx for sharing!

Halo22B

Yes I agree with everything you said....but the expectation of a LN wallet that duplicates the security of a self custodial Layer1BTC wallet is naive. I can safely self custody my BTC without running a node and doing very little beyond writing down 12 words...LN, not so much. Knowing this I trade the speed and convenience of LN for the security of BTC. I cover myself by only keeping the equivalent of a cheap night out on WoS. Different tools for different jobs

yellowsockss

thank you. so submarine swaps are basically a way for new btc to enter the LN with lower fees? i guess i need to do more homework on how that works

Bitcoin_Maximalist

switch to a pure LN wallet