/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>19290289
Full retard. Trust in Luke Dashjr
If BTC fails, fall back to cryptonotes like LOKI. That's our only chance.

>>19290289
The entire point of Segwit is to enable Lightning Network (still doesn't work). LN allows the Goldsmith IOU scam 2.0, plus the added benefit to banks to get in between Bitcoin transactions to keep them in control of money.

>>19290289
You are a moron and the cashie delusion is about to come to it's final, inevitable end.

>>19290328
>You are a moron
Oh, so it's NOT avoiding block creations, right?
It wouldn't be like creating bitcoin without writing each transaction in a new block, right?

>>19290289
>Am i going full retard
yes
multisig and TX malleability fix is not some big fucking update lmao

>>19290311
>still doesn't work
it's live, dumbass lol
did you forget to update your fud?

>>19290289
>Wouldn't that be like fractional reserve banking..?
do you know what fractional reserve is?

>>19290289

>>19290643
Right, i meant kinda like that.
I meant in the sense of having transactions outside the blockchain and thus the ledger.
Like, if that were to be implemented in bitcoin, wouldn't that be like a banker (in the old days before the distopia) creating a transaction outside of the ledger?
It's not like that, right?

>>19290646
Heh. i'm a bit tired dude, so i'm kinda like that atm.

>>19290630
Nobody uses it and it still loses people money.
>update your fud

People who think I'm purposely trying to mislead are more than welcome to continue buying BTC and I hope they do.

https://bitcoinvisuals.com/lightning

>>19290846
What's your opinion on the ligthening network then?
I'm trying to understand a bit of the structure in the abstract sense, to picure it in my head before i got look at the code (i kinda learn like that).
Could you explain it to me, please?

>>19290903
Well it's like I said here: >>19290311

If you're familiar with money creation, goldsmiths and bankruns. Then you'll understand how it is these Lightning hubs can operate and where small blocks take us.

High fees and slow transaction times insure very little activity happens onchain, in fact it's entirely prohibitive at scale for anyone besides banks to use. So what you end up with is middlemen in Bitcoin (the thing Bitcoin eliminates at least for transactions) because nobody besides banks with massive liquidity pools can even use the technology.

Its funny, the biggest argument for BTC is "muh nodes", but they argue for a system that isn't checked by user nodes at all (actually even the current system isn't). Sure the BTC will settle onchain, but everything that happens before that (off chain) isn't bound by the same rules as Bitcoin. Especially when nobody even owns the Bitcoin themselves anymore because it's not practical to transact with outside of payment processors.

>>19290903
>I'm trying to understand a bit of the structure in the abstract sense, to picure it in my head

I got you senpai. It's hub and spoke centralized banking layer. It also destroys the entire incentive model of mining, as transactions are taken off chain. The problems with it are so numerous, that going through them all is pointless as simply one is sufficiently fatal.

>>19290289
I'm not convinced you understood a single word of what you just said, or what segwit even is.

Don't mention the
F A T A L
L
A
W

>>19291375
>transactions are taken off chain
???
Then it IS a bit like fractional reserve banking?
How the hell would you call transactions off the chain?

bump

>>19292515
>Then it IS a bit like fractional reserve banking
yes it's in the Lightning whitepaper as shown in the picture here >>19290846

>How the hell would you call transactions off the chain?

The important thing to understand about Lightning is that when all transactions happen off-chain, miners don't generate fee revenue. This undermines the security and sustainability of the network, which is all based in mining profits. With each halving event, miners become more and more dependent on transaction fees, until the subsidy is removed entirely and transaction fees is the ONLY income miners will generate. It's a ticking timebomb under Bitcoin - scale or die.

Miners don't just secure the network out of the goodness of their hearts, it costs a lot of money in electricity. This is the paradox of a system like lightning - it is supposed to enhance Bitcoin by making traffic happen off chain, but instead it undermines all the economic incentives that make Bitcoin work to begin with.

Lightning proponents also say that the reason on-chain scaling doesn't work, is because it will centralize Bitcoin. Yet their solution to prevent Bitcoin from becoming centralized is to to take all transactions into a centralized banking network. Que???

And I haven't even touched on the legal issues.

Everything about it is retarded.

>>19291229
>but everything that happens before that (off chain) isn't bound by the same rules as Bitcoin. Especially when nobody even owns the Bitcoin themselves anymore because it's not practical to transact with outside of payment processors.
No way it's real.
Like.. That would make bitcoin pointless..
The idea was like to create a "new element", right?
But like that you just end up where you were before, right?

>>19290302
>Trust in Luke Dashjr
OH NONONONO NO LOOK AT DIS DUDE

>>19290311
> The entire point of Segwit is to enable Lightning Network (still doesn't work).

It does work tho.

>>19292799
>when all transactions happen off-chain
Like, i don't get this, man.
Seems to me that the point of bitcoin was to eliminate trust in banks, use ONE ledger, so that no retarded shit would take place.
But that's exaclty what the bankers did when they had gold and made fraud, no?

>Lightning proponents also say that the reason on-chain scaling doesn't work, is because it will centralize Bitcoin. Yet their solution to prevent Bitcoin from becoming centralized is to to take all transactions into a centralized banking network. Que???
I mean, come on.
No way.
Like.. wtf.

>>19292799
>when all transactions happen off-chain
Those transactions, where are they recorded?

Bump.

>>19290289
>Like, that's just my retardation talking, right?
yeah

>>19293524
How so?

>>19290311
>The entire point of Segwit is to enable Lightning Network
not true, fixing malleability is nice makes building on the protocol easier, but not the main point of segwit is not that.
the main point of segwit is to separate the financial transaction required to build the utxo from the parts of the transactions only needed to validate the spend conditions.

>>19293545
you asked the question
>this shit right here will enable to generate bitcoin outside of the blockchain?
and that's just going full retard. segwit doesn't do anything else than restructure the bitcoin transaction so that the witness part can be discarded after the block has been confirmed as it only plays a role during the consensus.

>>19290620
bitcoin had all the capability of segwit before with p2sh. the only thing that changed is the burden.

>>19292821
Yes, it does make the entire purpose irrelevant when everything is handed right back to the bankers to be middlemen in the system. They retain their parasitic relationship with the economy. Anyone who thought they would just lay down and let Bitcoin strip them of their power are delusional.

The people at fault are idealistic or actual malicious developers and complacent miners. We're starting to see a change in attitude which comes with more and more pressure mounting from the block subsidy halving every four years.

The argument from Segwit supporters is that high fees are good. That because miners need fees eventually to sustain themselves outsourcing transactions to banks/payment processors who settle up every week or so on chain with high fees the miners will be fed. The problem with this is this kind of system offers no competitive advantage over any contemporary system. Not only can the banks keep control do Goldsmith 2.0, but all the features that make Bitcoin worth using disappear (micro transactions, no middlemen, instant payment, etc.). So there is then no incentive to use it over fucking Apple pay outside of gambling (HODL!) on the price. That'll never get widespread use from things that matter like businesses and government.

The alternative is scale Bitcoin. Miners make money off transaction volume (millions to someday billions of transactions) and ALL of the incentives and features that make Bitcoin the important piece of technology that it is remain intact.

>>19291375
>It also destroys the entire incentive model of mining
yeah sure how will you use lightning without on-chain tx exactly?
it's just bulk settlement that scales exponentially instead of linearly for payments of the right size (above dirt below channel limits)

i have no argument against the spoke and hub shape, but exchanges already play a central role in the crypto ecosystem. right now interaction with them is fully custodial, ln can greatly improve that relationship. exchanges are perfectly positioned to become the biggest hubs and will naturally form the network around them.

>>19293736
>it does make the entire purpose irrelevant when everything is handed right back to the bankers to be middlemen in the system
that's just schizo rambling.
here is the deal: with fiat banks issue new currency at will, they own your money because your relationship with them is fully custodial.
with bitcoin you own your money because it's non custodial, and no one can create bitcoin at will it's scarcity is mathematically pre-determined.
you can't just start up your own bank one day there are thousands of hoops to jump through. anyone can start his own ln hub no registration no legislation no hassle. just fucking do it!
yeah totally the same.

>>19292874
Did you just realize now that BTC was subverted and taken over by bankers? lel that's so 2015.

Welcome to crypto, where Fed bankers LARP as cypherpunks to fool the goyim.

>>19292913
They aren't recorded anywhere. It breaks the public accounting system of Bitcoin, which is exactly the purpose.

>>19293914
What the fuck is the point of Bitcoin at all if you are just going to use a centralized hub and spoke banking layer anyway??

I can only lol at this logic, corecucks are on some maximum braindamage.

>>19294183
that's because you don't understand. ln has a trustless fallback to main-chain that is a byzantine fault tolerant decentralized ledger. even if the ln network gets centralized there is no way to abuse that power. worst you can do is inconvenience people and lose them as clients but you can't scam them out of their money.

>>19294183
also you gonna have to explain how you "create" new bitcoins in ln because this is the most retarded fud i read so far.

>>19294224
Oh no, it's retarded

>>19294257
you can't lose your coins when you are trying to spend. you can only lose your coins when you are trying to receive. whihc none of you cucks will. you will just use it as a cc.

>>19294291
basically your payment either goes through or not.
that's not the issue, mostly hubs have a risk exposure coming from different timelocks on the channels involved on their two side. the businesses that receive only also have some risk associated with their payments if they go offline before settlement. sure, professional payment providers or watchtower services have to pick up the slack if you can't provide the necessary infrastructure. but i suspect 99.9% of the businesses will use a payment provider because they want fiat and payment providers are pros will have no problem with online redundancy.

>19294357
Imagine avoiding all of this nonsense and just using Bitcoin instead.

>>19294291
The absolute state of Lightning cucks.

>>19294291
Imagine unironically shilling for this garbage OH NO NO NO

>>19292846
just remember
7 KIDS
Luke is unironically the most based dev out there

>>19294476
>>19294497
What's the matter, anon? Too #reckless for you to be hard money of the future?

>>19294384
well the nonsense is about burden and concern.
why make local concern a global burden? makes absolutely no sense to me.

bitcoin onchain is global burden it's distributed in storage which makes it worse without any benefit that usually comes from such centralization (ie storing everything / keeping record at one place). it doesn't scale.

lightning makes only the settlement global burden and the individual transactions are only burdening those that are involved.

sidechains are in between. they can make local commerce local burden can use more centralization or even a trusted authority / federation while still having a trustless exit to main-chain thus removing any benefits from abusing that power.

one day maybe a few cashies will understand. i lost hope that most will ever get it. too fucking dumb for it.

>>19294476
well bugs and other software malfunctions may result in you losing money obviously. not very likely tho. but generally speaking you have no risk associated with spending on ln. but sure you should limit your risk by having proper backups and limiting the amount you have in your spend wallet. some things never change.

>>19290289
BSV solves this.

>>19294710
Facts