If you can afford a unilateral exit in the first place, you can open a Lightning channel.
The scam is that it claims to offer solutions, when in fact all it does is introduce trust and centralization as trade-offs
Lightning wallets can use trust and centralization to for better UX, but that doesn't get hyped up by hipsters and investment like the "current thing"
That’s not really relevant, because your argument would be applied equally to suggest sub chain-fee Lightning transactions can’t work or aren’t real because you can’t just send them on chain. It’s a layer, the unilateral exit is the cost of *enforcement.* That cost is exactly what allows all normal transactions to *not* require it.
It’s like saying that we can’t actually have retail payments unless every single person can securely pay for a wire and there can be no trade unless every single person can take every single transaction to court and be adjudicated immediately.
Individual payment amount have nothing to do with it, it's about the totality of what you have locked up to go to the chain to settle the sum.
Fake L2's claim to make Lightning affordable while being trustless, but trustlessness costs the same regardless.
The way to make L2s that scale far beyond what the base layer can accomplish is to align incentives so that users can exit without the provider’s permission.
You don’t need everyone to exit all L2s at once and the capacity to pay for that cost en masse, to properly align incentives for individual hosts/providers to be trustworthy. You simply have to make being honest more profitable than being dishonest.
The most important factor is unilateral exit, because without it the ability for the user to enforce anything at all regardless of cost just doesn’t even exist.
hey Guy, how's IT going with the fam & house stuff? been bizi with my own fam needs & haven't had time to keep uP/*
Slow and steady wins the race… I hope 😂
Fake L2's don't scale anything
There's two factors in scaling
1) Transaction throughput: Lightning already scales transactions infinitely
2) Ownership: Distribution is the real bottleneck, there's a minimum amount of Bitcoin needed to not be dust and even at sub-sat fees today there's not enough Bitcoin for everyone to trustlessly transact (unilateral exit)... a few hundred million people at most... likely less as big accumulators like institutions continue to accumulate
2) ownership also involves the ability to batch the creation and securing of more Lightning channels.
Lightning already has batch opens that reduce costs 80%, but no one uses that because cost isn't a bottleneck.
Ark batching also doesn't lower the boundary on unilateral exit.
Fake L2's literally solve nothing, Lightning for better or worse realizes the immutable physics of the chain. Fake L2's are just re-branding for smugglers of centralization and trust. Shitcoiners 2.0 
These posts are just shilling hopium. It should say "what this MIGHT bring to bitcoin" of course it would still require research, development and market fit.
