LN requires orders-of-magnitude more block chain transaction bandwidth for peak garbage collection phases, than it consumes normally. Thus you need Bitcoin to scale massively before LN can scale massively.
Not really, no ("order-of-magnitude").
Lauda you are not a software engineer for 30 years. You don't know what you are talking about.
The garbage collection load on LN is entirely dependent on how many payment channels close within any given block. The statistical outliers are in the orders-of-magnitude.
Please if you are going to argue, cite some expert resource. Otherwise your comments are useless to me.
Bitcoin can't scale without being centralized for validation and mining. That is fact well known to experts such as myself. Many people may deny it and I have no desire to argue with them.
Even though that is correct ('can't scale efficiently'), the claim "experts such as myself" is really pointless in this context.
As evident above, it is entirely relevant.
LN also requires a few numbers of centralized servers cooperating for it to function reasonably well:
Not really, no.
I am referring to supporting millions of users ("wallets").
I quoted the lead developer of LN who stated it is the case. Then you disagree with him.
LN is an incredibly complex Rube Goldberg kludge patched on top of an inadequate block chain design and there IS a better solution coming. You have to discard the Bitcoin block chain and Satoshi's design and start over.
If by better, you mean partially-centralized scam coins that are being pumped, then you're wasting our time.
Your ignorance of what is coming, is not my problem.
Pull out your moderation powers to move the thread or otherwise censor it.