Quote from: Timelord2067 on Today at 05:46:42 AM

It goes without saying if bitcoin were to become worth $1M, or even $100k, then it might be very tempting to cash that amount out and install a much small amount in its place.

By the time that happens, splicing-out will have been already implemented. It will allow them to remove some coins from that channel without closing it.

Quote from: Timelord2067 on Today at 05:46:42 AM

With BTC 10 I'd probably go the other way and open 1,000 channels worth BTC 0.001 each. That would enable me to have a much wider spread of nodes / regional access than just sending coins backwards and forwards to just one other node.

In my opinion, 0.001 BTC per channel is too little. You would quickly run into liquidity problems and most of your channels would be unbalanced. Still, that's a better strategy than none! It might actually work to some extent.

Quote from: Timelord2067 on Today at 05:46:42 AM

Which node do they connect to?

It's a channel between ACINQ and OpenNode.com

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on Today at 06:15:17 AM

If you have at least two channels with a lot of capacity, you potentially can charge higher fees because some transactions would need to be routed through your node, and you would potentially have a higher volume of transactions route via your node for similar reasons.

Large channel =/= increase in volume. Your connectivity is far more important.

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on Today at 06:15:17 AM

To my knowledge, it is not possible to route a portion of a payment through a channel. So if you have channels with BTC 0.001 of capacity on each side, you would be unable to handle any transactions above this amount.

Payments can be split into many small chunks and sent through different routes. See Atomic Multi-Path Payments.