Quote from: smooth on May 15, 2016, 10:59:32 AM

It'll be about as decentralized and permissionless as Bitcoin is...

Which is a future like this:

Quote from: Gillette on May 15, 2016, 09:31:12 AM

DAO crap is as crap as ETH !

"Crap I failed to buy that 1000% ROI crap."

We were crazy for ignoring what Bernie ~~Sanders~~Madoff was selling, until the clawbacks[1]...

Oh so you aren't aware they can come take your profits long after you've disposed of the asset. This is a clawback.[1]

[1]	http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-behind-how-gerald-celente-got-screwed-by-mf-global-2011-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/two-mf-global-clients-share-their-stories-2011-11

Quote from: smooth on May 15, 2016, 10:59:32 AM

Quote from: sockpuppet1 on May 15, 2016, 10:55:41 AM

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

I haven't studied this carefully but I've been told (maybe incorrectly) that with duplex channels this is (or will be with some script improvements) possible. Party A can open a channel to party B and then party B can either close the channel and accept the payment as simple Bitcoin, or just reuse the channel to send those coins back out.

Obviously in the former case, it isn't an instant microtransaction in a decentralized, 100.000 Txns/sec system, because it requires the Bitcoin block chain to handle that volume.

The entire point is that LN is a microtransaction system for a corporate behemoth controlled internet (where everyone has an account with a corporate entity), not for an internet where there are millions of artists receiving payments in a decentralized chaotic pattern.