Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

Quote

On the other hand, innovation tends to come when there's a need for it. And we do need innovation, for a proper scalability solution.

If it would be easy, we'd have it by now.

I don't expect to be easy.
LN is under used and doesn't seem to get a chance to mature because people are still expecting reasonable fees on-chain. (And yes, this includes me too, I know).

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

Who's going to open a LN channel if it costs $50? And another $50 or more to close the channel? If something goes wrong (which has happened to me opening a channel), you're down $100 without any results.

You won't like my answer, but, on the other hand, I think I've said it in the past that LN makes sense only for companies, i.e. as a service.
Yes, this means custodial, which is many will say "omg, never use custodial" when they are keeping their fiat in banks' hands. Of course, the bigger/consolidated amounts for long term storage have to go into self custody still, I am not idiot.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

In the past year, how many payments have you made that are worth $50 in fees? I can't think of anything.

I didn't. I am as guilty as the most. The closest I can get is a consolidation I've waited for patiently for a couple of months and I've still ended up paying about 15$ in fees.
But the last 6+ months were more suitable for accumulating than spending, so it was no biggie to wait, not this time.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

Agreed. It's not a permanent fix. But it may give Bitcoin some space to grow until there's a better solution.

I've seen in may life too many temporary fixes remaining there forever...

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

How do you see Bitcoin in 20 years, if the majority of users can only "own" Bitcoin on a CEX or ETF?

Look at El Salvador, they are happily using Bitcoin, not really caring it's in most cases actually in others' custody.
And I would not be surprised other kinds of Bitcoin IOUs will catch on.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 04:13:38 PM

Quote

This may sound a bit anti-Bitcoin, but after four years of exploring Bitcoin, I've come to an important conclusion: Bitcoin is not meant for buying coffee or conducting other low-value transactions, at least not on-chain. It represents the best monetary standard we can have, and using it for such purposes undervalues its true potential.

My worry goes deeper: can it be a monetary standard if it can't be used by normal people?

There can be the direction that anybody can still withdraw their bitcoin, but it's not really feasible due to fees, for example. That's where we are going now: Bitcoin as a reserve asset.
But the history of gold shows us that it's a dangerous direction (and I don't have a proper alternative; but imho bigger block size is not one).

*sigh* we may be the lucky ones who got to own actual Bitcoins (or satoshis) like the ones owning gold coins 100 years ago.