Quote from: DooMAD on January 02, 2019, 07:42:07 PM

Quote from: franky1 on January 02, 2019, 04:12:38 PM

B. no one said everyone.. but it shouldnt exclude a certain class of people.
i guess your greed of wanting bitcoin only for the privileged out weighs the old ethos of open borderless unbanked..
anyway
show me how LN fits the concept of bitcoin
" A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending"

If only a small number of nodes exist, those nodes would effectively become the new financial institutions that users on the network are forced to rely on. Using Bitcoin isn't just about the cost of transactions, it's about the cost of being able to run a full node if you want to.

running a node is cheap
im not the one saying its expensive. i am not the one throwing the empty fears ..
you truly failed at trying to flip the argument.. but have a nice day

Quote from: DooMAD on January 02, 2019, 07:42:07 PM

Obviously we know which of those qualities you're willing to throw under the bus to get what you want.

your the one that wants people to f**k off the network and use other networks
your the one that claims people wont be able to run full nodes..

Quote from: DooMAD on January 02, 2019, 07:42:07 PM

Just because you might be able to afford a high-bandwidth internet package with generous usage limits, it doesn't mean those in other parts of the world can. Why do you want to exclude the non-wealthy from being able to run a node?

funny part is LN is going to do what your flip flopping about
LN masternodes monitoring multiple chains so that atomic swaps can happen makes a node have more challenges than just a bitcoin node.
so using LN and being a msternode for LN is not a solution but the comedy that if LN masternodes wont be a problem, then logic is a node for one coin is less of a problem.. thus by you promoting LN means you subtly admit that blockchains are not a problem

but putting aside the comedy of "nodes monitoring 3-5 coins is ok but monitoring one coin is costly"

the real concern people have is they dont want to have to put funds into a vaulted lockup and then only transact when another party is online to agree on moving funds. if they have available funds to move in their channels on your behalf..

in bitcoin
you dont need to be a full node. you dont need to wait for a particular node to be online to transact. you dont have to hope the other person has balance to be part of your payment route...

in LN
to avoid factories. you do need to be a master node. you do have to wait for particular nodes to be online, you do have to hope the other person has balance to be part of your payment route

but have a nice day. oh and please do your research