Hit me up with your best arguments against the Lightning Network.
The best I’ve seen is that there’s still a possibility that someone could fraudulently seize a channel if you aren’t doing paying attention.
The majority of arguments I’ve seen against it are really bad and often in bad faith.
LN is like cash. Someone could steal your wallet. You could leave it on a train. Simply accept a financial risk and control accordingly. My LN has low tens pounds on it, like my wallet.
Same.
The Lightning Network is a second-layer payment protocol that operates on top of the Bitcoin blockchain. It was designed to address some of the scalability issues facing Bitcoin by enabling faster and cheaper transactions off the main Bitcoin network. However, like any technology, it has its disadvantages.
One of the most sophisticated disadvantages of the Lightning Network is the routing problem. The Lightning Network depends on the existence of payment channels created between two parties. If I want to send Bitcoin to someone who is not directly connected to me, the payment must be routed through one or more intermediaries who have payment channels with both parties.
The routing problem arises when there are no available payment channels between the two parties, or the existing payment channels are not well-connected. In such cases, the payment cannot be routed, and the Lightning Network cannot be used. This can lead to increased complexity and cost for users, who may find it difficult to access some parts of the network
But then again this issue will be minor once mass adoption takes place :)
How common is it that you can’t find a route to another node?
full + expensive mempool for an extended period of time can bring LN to a grind without better / LN-native liquidity reallocation tools…
solving for scenarios where we may have full + expensive mempool for extended periods is the raison d’etre of LN
we’re used to LN in peaceful times and haven’t truly stressed it
