Who here was listening to Café Bitcoin today (or the Nostr Nests simulcast) and wants to discuss what Terrence from Swan Bitcoin said to Brad Mills: "Lightning is fucking tiny. It’s a joke. It doesn’t work at scale."
Discussion
I heard that
So far all the negative takes on Lightning I’ve heard are theories from people who don’t even use it.
Of course it’s small, so was bitcoin in 2011.
Of course we’re never going to have 8 billion people running their own nodes.
Is that the metric we’re supposed to be measuring its success by?
I find it fascinating how many Bitcoiners there are out there who have not experienced Lightning. So easy to dunk on something you have not experienced.
I bet this Terrence guy is not on Nostr either.
He’s not, as far as I could tell.
#[3] feel free to jump in with your rebuttal where you won’t get shouted over.
I am interested in learning more about ARK. This was the argument for this L2 compared to LN, citing scaling issues.
As I understand, Ark is meant to be interoperable with Lightning and add utility at the node level, not to simply replace it.
Yes, LN becomes a settlement layer, but I am at infancy in understanding it. #[3] had two episodes covering it, which was very helpful. I just need to go back and listen again to absorb it better.
Do you think that is a major benefit of Nostr zaps? It allows for testing of different transaction modalities well before this stuff really hits the mainstream?
I think people who don’t see the value of Lightning yet have never used it more than once if ever and probably walk around with a giant stick up their ass.