Raiden ~= LN, but it can actually be implemented because ethereum doesn't have to worry that in few years+ miners will need the fees to be able to provide security. Bitcoin will never have LN because miners want the fees.
What is the official ETA on Raiden? And separately the realistic ETA?
Hasn't the logic on LN been that the miners will see the light that they need to allow LN so they get the fees from the higher valued txns without destroying the growth from the lower valued txns, but you are I guess arguing a Tragedy-of-the-Commons wherein the miners can't think long-term and want to extract maximum value from the existing supply of transaction demand. Hasn't that been what all the wrangling behind the scenes between Core and Chinese cartel has been about? But if they can get a 51% cartel (and keep it hidden with a Sybil attack), then they might be able to align their priorities more long-term? But is it inherently impossible to have a long-term focus because the battle for who has 51% is open to all possible competitors so there might always be someone else willing to borrow more money and make more political handshakes. So I think I am seeing your point. Hmmm. The Scalepocalypse clusterfuck is even worse than I predicted it would be back when I first predicted the transaction fees and blocksize scalepocalypse back in 2013.