Quote from: jbreher on February 26, 2019, 09:08:09 PM

Quote from: HairyMaclairy on February 26, 2019, 09:03:54 PM

Quote from: jbreher on February 26, 2019, 08:42:20 PM

Quote from: Lightblock on February 26, 2019, 09:48:04 AM

Quote from: jbreher on February 26, 2019, 08:42:56 AM

Quote from: Gyrsur on February 26, 2019, 07:38:52 AM

Quote from: kenzawak on February 26, 2019, 07:37:19 AM

Bitcoin is Processing Fewer Payments Per Month Than It Was in 2016

https://www.longhash.com/news/bitcoin-is-processing-fewer-payments-per-month-than-it-was-in-2016

yes because of LN. Grin

EDIT: LN is off-chain and you cannot measure numbers. within a channel payments are not visible.

Hey, Gyrsur - you seem LN conversant. Maybe you can help me with something I've been puzzling over. 1ML (https://1ml.com/statistics) publishes something they call 'Updated Channels (24h)'. Are you aware of a definition of this term?

It means that some of the channel parameters have changed over the past 24 hours. Most of the time it is the capacity that changes - for example it could increase.

So... is it a count of on-chain txs made on the behalf of LN channels?

No it is a change in parameters, width of the pipe rather than how much water flows through the pipe.

And this parameter change is accomplished without making an on-chain tx?

it seems possible w/o an on-chain tx according to the LND documentation.

Quote from: https://dev.lightning.community/overview/#channel-updates

Channel updates are thus fully trustless. When making an update, both parties exchange the secrets for the prior state, so that all prior states will have been revoked except for the current state. Both parties will never broadcast an old state, because they know the other party can take all their money if they do so.

EDIT: this whole Lightning thing is a very (f***ing) complicated approach. no wonder that the Big Blockers don't like it. it's not easy to understand but it seems the right direction to scale Bitcoin.