oops 

 😬 

 We need lightning over #LoRa and #meshtastic and #ham.

Another option: we crowd fund a small satellite constellation. Sounds crazy but as the price of bitcoin goes up it becomes more affordable for our community. 

 Not crazy at all. 

 I saw a lighting node called "HAMnoder" the other day, and I wondered if he was running it over HAM. 

 Lightning over LoRa is not going to work, lightning has far too much overhead and LoRa has really (really really really) low bandwidth (the noisefloor magic aint free). You could use another PHY, but then still you are just spinning a whole lot of wheels to get a simple transaction through. Future potential softforks might make it a bit better. 

Something like ecash makes more sense; even then you might want to consider if the overhead is worth it given you are dealing with such heavy technical (and legal/regelulatory) constrains working within the lower frequency ISM band options; combined with the inherrent inefficiencies of the mesh topology 

 #Reticulum 

 packet size flow wars 

 I remember back when this kind of data initially came out that nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7cnjvghxjme0qyghwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tcpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejz7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uq3jamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwwdhx7un59eek7cmfv9kz7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctcpzemhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qfrwaehxw309ahx7um5wgkhvetjd9nxjety9emk2mrvdaexgetj9ehx2ap0qylhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytt4wdsju6mpx9nkyet0vyerzcnwd5h82uedwajhxapdxghxxuewv9kkz7n0dekxjemgw3ekz6tv9e3k7mf0qy2hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68yt35xvuxytnwv46z7qpqe0z776cpe0gllgktjk54fuzv8pdfxmq6smsmh8xd7t8s7n474n9snrh2rn  mentioned it was not really accurate due to the ability to make it seem like your node is hosted on one of these when it's not. 

I'm not really technical so I can't really explain it, though the number of nodes that aren't actually hosted on these is probably quite small overall. 

However I think this is a symptom of the quite relaxed environment LN is on rn, I believe if attacks were to start happening this hosting data would change quite a bit.

It's like bitcoin mining, if under attack it decentralizes more and more, otherwise it takes advantage of the friendly environment. 

 That argument never resonated with me. The number of hosts that obfuscate their IP is likely negligible. 

 i run 3 nodes and they all pretend to be somewhere they’re not 🤷 sample size of one tho 

 This is pretty misleading, as it shows nodes, not capacity, and excludes Tor.

There’s also the fact that at least for a lot of the smaller share ones, they may be used just for proxying for a public IP.

Not that this means anything as if it is shut down, new nodes can come up to replace them in other networks 

 Pretty sure the number of servers doing that is so small that it's irrelevant. I've never seen any data to convince me of the opposite.

Even if, it wouldn't matter since we're talking about network use here not where the server is located. 

 used to shit on shitcoiners for doing this. bitcoiners are getting complacent