That much should be obvious, he's CEO of
https://yalls.org/, which sometimes used to try LN first time. Even myself have tried it previously, even though i use testnet edition few years ago.
Simply have lots of capital isn't enough, there should be reason why i should connect to your channel. People is more likely to create new channel when they pay for service or goods.
So simply, he's earning by leveraging his company, yalls.org, to have as much connections as it can?
[/quote]
Most likely, but it's just my speculation.
So simply, he's earning by leveraging his company, yalls.org, to have as much connections as it can? Why aren't exchanges starting to run/operate their own Lightning nodes? The incentive is there.
Quoting my old answer
What's the technical problem with Lightning? What is making the exchanges hesitant from integrating it to complement their service? Plus are there business development people behind Lightning Labs to handle onboarding the exchanges and other institutions?
Aside from what @jackg said and classical problem such as "why bother upgrade if it's not broken" or "the code is poorly written/have no proper documentation", there are few specific concern (both technical and non-technical) such as :
1. What happen when a channel is closed, but the used on-chain transaction fee is low and there are many pending transaction on mempool?
2. Most LN implementation (e.g. LND and c-lightning) are still on beta, which isn't acceptable for most exchange and writing their own LN implementation isn't an option for smaller exchange.
3. Educating customer who don't know their LN wallet doesn't accept incoming transaction