I wish I could easily upload these clips to nostr but I can’t. So I made a thread on shitter about why lightning is a dead end 💀 based on the recent news the past few weeks. #lightning #bitcoin

https://x.com/sovereign_matt/status/1717455222279188973?s=46&t=ZAUw02fsXKhWMkEvtf61aA


I think there is no harm in allocating some sats to venture capital like the LN, everything that is build on top of Bitcoin is VC at this stage.

What did they propose would then scale Bitcoin to the World?

[813910]


I agree that Lightning is not the answer. And I presented a question to asknostr earlier this week asking what we do when fees get substantially higher for substantially longer, and essentially got a shrug in return.

We're not ready, and this next bull market we're really going to feel it.


I’m not against Vc fundraising. I am pro capitalism and competition. The only issue is lightning is the only layer 2 in town that’s classed as on bitcoin. More competition for different layer 2s is better for users and bitcoin price.


lol I didn’t even mention the fees in my thread.

But yes if L1 fees become too expensive for plebs to open channels. LN is broken scaling model.


Last time this happened people started using Litecoin. 🤦


So you’re saying Segwit wasn’t the right move & we should have just raised the blocksize correct?


Yep fully agree. More competition would be very healthy for the ecosystem. I did not have the time yet to study Liquid, could that be considered as a competitor to LN?

[813911]


Well what do you expect when no one want to do why should have been done in the first place.
Bigger blocks.
It’s always been that fucking simple.
Bigger blocks will bring fees down.
Bigger blocks will let in more transactions to make up for the small fees.
Miners still get paid, we still get to make cheap transactions.


That wouldn't scale either. It would be a short term bandaid and you'd need to completely tip the apple cart to implement.


Well Liquid requires trusting a federation and it’s not on bitcoin.

It’s a separate blockchain with its own functionalities but basically blockstream can steal your bitcoin or give up financial records to the state whenever it’s pushed to. Liquid federators/investors take a cut in fees for transactions. You have no privacy despite its claims for confidential transactions. It’s basically like trusting wallet of satoshi. Too much trust involved.

Why I push for drivechain over others is you can have multiple separate blockchains where users trust miners to follow their economic incentives and game theory like on Bitcoin main chain/L1. The transaction fees go to miners instead of federations/investors.


Big block sidechain keeping mainchain blocksize small so everyone can run a L1 node.


I’m saying lightning experiment failed. It’s time to look for other solutions maybe this time with a long term practical plan.


Just no.


I don’t think I have much of say. But just making position known maybe it will help others understand.

Apparently bitcoin core want to soft fork to fix the security vulnerability in the LN. Complete shitshow really.


I had no idea for Liquid, will read up on this.

[813917]


Nobody uses it and been around longer than LN. 😅


Have we not learned that side chains/ merged mining just first work?
For fucks sake you’ve read the white paper right? Right?
Why are we deviating from it when it works?
It just works.
Nothing else is needed.
Just the L1 blockchain.


Maybe the bcashers are right. I don’t know. It’s a shitshow that’s for sure what’s happening with scaling bitcoin atm.


Again why are we deviating from the white paper?


You been here longer than me. Maybe you can tell me hahaha


Screen record then post to Nostr when dealing with walled info…


Well the LTC/Fiat chart does look like it’s ready for that 🤓


Videos are 5 mins long each. Not able to upload.


If I was a trader I'd probably be scooping up some LTC waiting for the next BTC fee nightmare.

But I'd rather just stack more sats. 🔥


I was reading that ordinal degens are trying to move their tokens to taproot assets. So if that shitcoin casino takes off lightning could break.

I am pretty sure Udis goal with Taproot wizards is to break lightning.


Harsh conclusion. Will give your thoughts a good read/listen 😉🙏🏻


Yeah 90% of everyone forgot that the 1mb limit was temporary & that the internet would get better Lmfao.

But no one cares and thinks we need more broken code to fix what wasn’t broken.


I'm dumbfounded at how many folks seem to think the shitcoinery on Bitcoin is over. We just got a taste. It's going to get so much worse.


Honest question: does the white paper say to increase block size?


Is it really so simple ?


It doesn’t even mention there is a limit


Yes


Damn bummer


I wish I could easily upload these clips to nostr but I can’t. So I made a thread on shitter about why lightning is a dead end 💀 based on the recent news the past few weeks. #lightning #bitcoin

https://x.com/sovereign_matt/status/1717455222279188973?s=46&t=ZAUw02fsXKhWMkEvtf61aA


Is this the joke?
https://m.primal.net/HOfG.jpg
https://m.primal.net/HOfG.jpg


Maybe x is down for you? Here’s the link again. https://x.com/sovereign_matt/status/1717455222279188973?s=46&t=ZAUw02fsXKhWMkEvtf61aA


It’s called shitter for a reason


Who stands to gain the most my keeping the block size smaller, keeping the transaction fees higher?

Who stands to gain the most from complex transactions to open ln channels?

Who stands to gain the most from merged mining & sidechains?


What is their argument for keeping Block size smaller? Ive never understood this.


So people in poorer countries could run full nodes easier.


All three questions have the same answer.

Miners.

Which miners the ones who can’t afford to run at a loss.

Which miners are they?

The corporate company miners.

Why does this scare people?


Does this take into account the increase in value of Bitcoin over time ? Is that fee going to increase un-proportionally as well? Genuine question


More adoption means more demand for onchain transactions which can cause fees to spike. It happens often in  bull runs. Not happened since end of 2021.


Of course not. There are always tradeoffs. Small blocks = more blocks = more participation = greater decentralization. Larger blocks may also slow down settlement as generally smaller blocks means more frequent blocks.


Changing the block size has absolutely nothing to do with block time.

Smaller blocks doesn’t mean faster blocks times.
Bigger blocks doesn’t mean slower block times.


Right that's difficulty


Yes that’s what makes the adjustments to keep ~10 min blocks  as hash rate changes.


This makes sense. There is a trade off. It’s not so simple.


I was more just trying to understand his point of view.


Enjoy the ride


You think that’s how things work?


What is your opinion on the notion that block size increase is just kicking the can? Scheduled block size increases?


Dynamic block sizes


Go get Peter Todds job. Tell em to get sorted haha


Live the dream


Maybe I fucking will.


I knew my thread would inspire someone to take action. haha


Are you implying bcashers were right?

Even if lightning is fucked and Bitcoin needs to increase its blocksize. Neither BTC nor BCH will gain from it.

In my opinion only Monero with its dynamic blocksize and opt-out privacy stands a chance to unite cypherpunks.

nostr:nevent1qqsg7fjgju9gw0mfd4j0rykm0l39f50lfmypvqu8lym2eccrsm8kmhspr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmqzyp8lcydl5tu9z6hgh37xh7pzwhf43ersg4zxy5979589vyhzzsyzsqcyqqqqqqgl47t24


I am think sidechain scaling is the way to go like BIP300 or BitVM. Maybe rollups if they are actually trustless but rollups atm are centralised.


It's beta.... it can be recovered.  If not side chains like liquid will start to take off. Or as others stated folk move to ltc for payment/spend. I was one that moved my spend money from ltc to lightning when I found it mature enough to use. I'm confident the issues will be worked out.


I'm working on something for media on nostr. Stay tuned.


Instant follow


Don't you think side chains will open Bitcoin for new unexpected vulnerabilities?


It moves all the complexity to sidechains to deal with. Something goes wrong on l2 doesn’t affect l1.

Whereas lightning is closely tied to l1.


decentralizing rollups would be easier than fixing the issues with lightning imo