https://cointelegraph.com/news/study-low-reliability-for-successfully-routing-payments-on-lightning-network
Shall we call the 0.4% , oh I don't know , Maybe A BANK!!!
FYI:
https://diar.co/volume-2-issue-25/
FYI2:
In an I told you so moment.
Time 7 hours ago,
https://cointelegraph.com/news/homeland-security-agents-posing-as-darknet-crypto-traders-arrest-criminals
Next Step for homeland posing as a LN hub and collecting data to arrest doomad as an illegal money transmitter.
Here are some tips for you guys running LN hubs and plan to do it without a money transmitter license:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-way-to-evade-a-police-helicopter
FYI3:
Some say Bitcoin Miners will also be targeted as money transmitters.
But that is simply untrue.
https://www.coindesk.com/fincen-bitcoin-miners-investors-money-transmitters/
Quote
the study suggests that the protocol stumbles when processing large amounts.
According to the study, the number of nodes and the fund capacity has been firmly increasing,
but the reliability of successfully routing a payment in the LN stays quite low, especially in regards to larger amounts.
On average, each node contains over four channels open and each channel has an average capacity of $20.
The probability of a successful payment operation with no more than a few dollars is 70 percent, while the success rate for a payment of less than $200 is 1 percent.
Another sticking point, which leads to the criticism of the LN, is that both parties, participating in a transaction have to be online at the time when the transaction occurs.
It is more appropriate to create a channel with someone who is always online and has enough liquidity to route larger transactions, the study says.
The lack of liquidity between nodes, and the online factor,
has led to the concentration of capacity to only a few large nodes.
Ten of the largest LN nodes (0.4% of total nodes) currently have 53% of the networks capacity
while the remaining 2,500 nodes have 47%.
As per the study, to successfully route a transaction through a channel, it requires a higher amount loaded on a channel than that being transacted to the other party.
If the transaction cannot be routed to the required recipient, it fails and the funds are returned to the sender, it says.
According to the study, the number of nodes and the fund capacity has been firmly increasing,
but the reliability of successfully routing a payment in the LN stays quite low, especially in regards to larger amounts.
On average, each node contains over four channels open and each channel has an average capacity of $20.
The probability of a successful payment operation with no more than a few dollars is 70 percent, while the success rate for a payment of less than $200 is 1 percent.
Another sticking point, which leads to the criticism of the LN, is that both parties, participating in a transaction have to be online at the time when the transaction occurs.
It is more appropriate to create a channel with someone who is always online and has enough liquidity to route larger transactions, the study says.
The lack of liquidity between nodes, and the online factor,
has led to the concentration of capacity to only a few large nodes.
Ten of the largest LN nodes (0.4% of total nodes) currently have 53% of the networks capacity
while the remaining 2,500 nodes have 47%.
As per the study, to successfully route a transaction through a channel, it requires a higher amount loaded on a channel than that being transacted to the other party.
If the transaction cannot be routed to the required recipient, it fails and the funds are returned to the sender, it says.
Shall we call the 0.4% , oh I don't know , Maybe A BANK!!!
FYI:
https://diar.co/volume-2-issue-25/
Quote
KYC REQURIMENTS TO BUCK TREND OF LARGE HUBS?
While these hubs exert no control over the network, they could, technically be considered money transmitters
While these hubs exert no control over the network, they could, technically be considered money transmitters
FYI2:
In an I told you so moment.
That other LN hub might be the FBI recording your transactions for their appending arrest warrant.
They do shit like that all of the time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/us/more-federal-agencies-are-using-undercover-operations.html
They do shit like that all of the time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/us/more-federal-agencies-are-using-undercover-operations.html
Time 7 hours ago,
https://cointelegraph.com/news/homeland-security-agents-posing-as-darknet-crypto-traders-arrest-criminals
Quote
Agents acting under the purview of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) have arrested more than 35 criminals by posing as cryptocurrency traders on the darknet, according to a DOJ release published yesterday, June 26. Officials also seized more than $23.6 million in criminal gains.
Next Step for homeland posing as a LN hub and collecting data to arrest doomad as an illegal money transmitter.
Here are some tips for you guys running LN hubs and plan to do it without a money transmitter license:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-way-to-evade-a-police-helicopter
FYI3:
Some say Bitcoin Miners will also be targeted as money transmitters.
But that is simply untrue.
https://www.coindesk.com/fincen-bitcoin-miners-investors-money-transmitters/
Quote
The US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) published two new rulings on 30th January that aim to bring clarity as to which players in the virtual currency space will fall under the Bank Secrecy Act's (BSA) definition of a money transmitter.
FinCEN said that miners who mine virtual currency for their own use,
as well as companies that purchase and sell convertible virtual currency solely as an investment aren't subject to this law.
"The first ruling states that,
to the extent a user creates or "mines" a convertible virtual currency solely for a user's own purposes, the user is not a money transmitter under the BSA.
The second states that a
company purchasing and selling convertible virtual currency as an investment exclusively for the company's benefit is not a money transmitter,"
FinCEN said that miners who mine virtual currency for their own use,
as well as companies that purchase and sell convertible virtual currency solely as an investment aren't subject to this law.
"The first ruling states that,
to the extent a user creates or "mines" a convertible virtual currency solely for a user's own purposes, the user is not a money transmitter under the BSA.
The second states that a
company purchasing and selling convertible virtual currency as an investment exclusively for the company's benefit is not a money transmitter,"