Quote from: hisslyness on February 20, 2019, 05:36:49 PM

Quote from: jbreher on February 20, 2019, 03:57:42 PM

Quote from: hisslyness on February 20, 2019, 07:16:48 AM

Quote from: jbreher on February 20, 2019, 06:27:14 AM

Quote from: BobLawblaw on February 19, 2019, 06:57:12 AM

Quote from: ðºÞæ on February 19, 2019, 06:31:54 AM

Yeh lets abandon the Bitcoin Network and jump on xrp version 2 lightning network (LN) instead.

I beg your pardon ?

Lightning IS Bitcoin.

Lightning transactions are not on chain, so they are therefore not Bitcoin transactions. So if LN txs are not Bitcoin txs, it follows that ...

I'm not trying to claim that LN is useless. It will likely have benefits for some limited applications. But to pin BTC's future on it when simpler methods were available... smh.

Going to have to pull you up on that one mate... LN Opens and Closed channel onchain. therefore they are BTC transactions.

Just no. The opening and the closing are Bitcoin transactions. All the in-channel transactions are NOT Bitcoin transactions. Sorry. This should be obvious.

Quote

On another note, i don't know why people are discounting LN. This is some awesome development/technology. What you see now may be different in 5 -10 years from now, there alot of smart people with forward thinking minds.

I'm only 'discounting' LN against the absurd claims made for it. As a layer 2 protocol, I'm completely whatevs with whatever all y'all want to do with a layer 2 thingy. The galling thing is that the underlying base protocol was intentionally crippled in order to implement LN. The fact that such crippling wasn't even necessary only adds insult to injury, and calls into question the motives and wisdom of those who advocated for such.

We will see which "peer to peer payment" system will survive in 30 - 40 years from now.

I think we will see that having such a massive database was the death of BCH.

BTC without Layer 2 Scaling has more of a chance!

I don't think that would be death as that means it would be used continously to fill up to a large blockchain that isn't an issue with modern technology.

It would just be pruned but now is that something the BCH ideological group can deal with? I still believe BCH is at it's core an ideology of everything being on the chain. It isn't due to Satoshi, it isn't due to tech, they just think that changing that main core belief will lead to a crumbling future. If they give up on that in their mind what keeps supply from being next, or irreversible transactions.

I just don't see how micro transactions need to be on the network, the lightning network does essentially a preventative pruning.