Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on December 12, 2015, 05:15:44 PM

Quote from: eragmus on December 12, 2015, 04:40:01 PM

If I'm wrong about all this, then I look forward to a comprehensive refutation Wink

If I criticize projects mentioned by you it won't look good.

Check what these projects say about themselves. Start from the project 1 - http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper-DRAFT-0.5.pdf. For example, read section 5.5 and tell me how nanopayments are possible.

Quote

5.5. Fees
Lightning Network Fees, which differ from blockchain fees, are paid directly between
participants within the channel. The fees pay for the time-value of money for consuming the
channel for a determined maximum period of time, and for counterparty risk of noncommunication.

No, feel free to criticize away. Please don't avoid the questions + reasoning I've provided?

Refute it all, if able.

re: Lightning

It's better to source up-to-date documents. The paper you cited is 10 months old and was the first version released:

From the summary document:

Quote

Lightning enables one to send funds down to 0.00000001 bitcoin without custodial risk

Quote

The coming increase in internet-connected devices needs a platform for machine-to-machine payments and automated micropayment services. Lightning Network transactions are conducted off the blockchain without delegation of trust and ownership, allowing users to conduct nearly unlimited transactions between other devices.

eragmus

Posts

Merits