I'm not even wrong. lightning has 4600 bitcoins deposited into it. the top capacity nodes are all exchanges or some kind of custodian. systems on entirely separate blockchains have more bitcoins deposited into them. a single non-custodial system called threshold has 2900 bitcoins deposited into it, and there's over a hundred thousand more bitcoins deposited into other systems with varying degrees of trust involved. the EVM is the most popular bitcoin scaling solution today, and it's a verifiable fact. when it comes to scaling bitcoin the market has spoken already, you just don't want to hear it.
Discussion
Just because some VC isnt blindly pumping fake liquidity into the network like you expect them to in daddy money EVM land doesnt mean its not operating. My node is working amazingly well, it backs itself up twice daily and has never encountered an issue. EVM is centralized garbage that cannot properly define integers.
the fact remains, the most popular way to scale bitcoin is by locking coins in a HTLC and issuing tokens against them on a separate blockchain using a smart contract. if the lightning network didn't have so many intractable flaws, people wouldn't have gravitated toward an EVM solution. if the lightning network is so wonderful, it would have the most bitcoins deposited into it. I keep hearing over and over again that the market cap of bitcoin is evidence that it is the best thing ever, but for some magical reason this same logic doesn't apply to the TVL of scaling solutions. your devs had 8 years to fix lightning and they wasted it huffing paint behind a dumpster the whole time.
thats not scaling thats a ponzi scheme lol
it's literally what blockstream liquid does. even lightning does this. it's bitcoins locked in a HTLC where they get unlocked on some other accounting system somewhere else. sometimes there is a decentralized two way peg like in the case of threshold tbtc or even lightning, and sometimes there actually isn't like in the case of blockstream liquid. people spent a lot of time talking about decentralized two way pegs. this whole thing is enabled by segwit, which made HTLCs possible in the first place. I guess you were not paying attention, all you focus on is lightning, and there are no other scaling solutions. I get the feeling that you have never actually studied any of these moving parts.
lmao youre just flip flopping and redefining things, I dont have time for such scatterbrain arguments, just fuck off you aint convincing me of squat
"your devs" yadda yadda yadda , get your faggot money talk out of here clown, I AM my devs
EVM doesnt scale period, you speak like a total end user and its hilarious. I can tell you have zero developer experience. Take your word salad back to the web3 metaverse bro
you can't own your own money on lightning without making transactions on L1, and there is a limited capacity for people to do that. since this pressure exists, people are pushed into lightning custodians where they don't own their own money. lightning doesn't actually scale, it just rearranges itself into a custodial system by emulating banking. a good scaling solution would enable users to obtain coins on L2 and actually own them without having to directly touch L1. then L2 transactions would get compressed into proofs and inserted into L1 blocks. each L2 user would collectively pay into L1 transaction fees by having their transactions included in a proof. this blows the lid off of the node requirements, since the security is inherited from L1 once a transaction is published in a L1 proof. there are good scaling solutions and lightning simply isn't one of them.
you have no clue what you're talking about, there are zero l2s that never touch l1, if they never touched l1 how would you go on and off dipshit? You are so dumb it hurts, please stop. Forreal
you do touch L1, but only to get on and off, it only needs to happen to a coin once, and not everyone has to do it to maintain sovereignty. a person could transfer a million coins to a rollup, send them to other people who have never touched L1 before, and all the recipients would actually own them. this isn't possible with lightning. rollups don't use payment channels, they don't have concepts like inbound liquidity, and they don't require an individual user to interact with L1 to start owning his own coins. with lightning, you have to open your own channels from time to time and do L1 transactions to top off your inbound liquidity. there are also other limitations with payment channels that don't apply to rollups, such as routing issues and the size of payments.
lol still you have no clue what you are saying, you suppose people have sovereignty because they depend on other people to move liquidity for them? Are you even aware of what you are saying dude, I cant imagine you are