why do you think DNMs all use monero, some don't use bitcoin at all, and none of them use lightning? technical and economic problems. if it was a useless shitcoin we wouldn't see DNMs getting it to work for electronic commerce for several years in a row. bitcoin maxis never have an answer for this.

you won't be able to copy your competition's homework if you are distracted by lightning, which is a complete dead end. throw it away.

no computer program will save you from totalitarianism. you have to get rid of your leaders by any means necessary. physical removal. without a computer.

>I'll just switch to a computer program that is more gooder

won't help. you have to switch the government.

there's no such thing as rights. if someone does something to you that you don't like, you have to do something to make them stop. "muh rights" as you shake uncontrollably behind a keyboard. saying "muh rights" won't help you. "I'll just use a different computer program, surely that will save me."

privacy by default was a fundamental property of money. nobody noticed or thought to write it down until money began to be sent through computers.

stop using custodial wallets. just completely stop. not even a little bit. and stop using scaling solutions like lightning that push people into custodial wallets because of their horrible design. custodians are the enforcement arm of the surveillance state. your money will be seized.

federation is gangbang cuckoldry

THERE IS NO SECOND BEST

users who want self-custody are punished by high fees. it didn't have to be this way, but the focus on lightning is creating this pressure. it costs too much to open channels. if lightning wasn't stagnating and instead growing, the costs would only rise. a different L2 wouldn't have this limitation.

that's ok I still hate her ( *︾▽︾)

I keep running into people who tell me that I don't understand lightning and they didn't read the documentation. I understand lightning completely. it's the thing I'm supposed to praise mindlessly so that the price of bitcoin will go up. I can pretend to use it and ignore its shortcomings or I can torture myself by attempting to run a node. doesn't matter. I am supposed to praise lightning so bitcoin go up. anyone who doesn't like lightning is trying to make bitcoin go down, so I have to disagree with them! anything they say, I must disagree. they don't understand that it's a prop we use to pretend that bitcoin is functional. we just don't talk about that part.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

so you've got the people who are stupid enough to muck around with

lightning, maybe if they are having a good time it's because a custodian

is taking care of them and they have no sovereignty, or they are

masochist neckbeard basement virgins who install gentoo.

then you've got the people who said fuck this, I'll just use monero or one of the ethereum rollups or litecoin or something.

the

second group of people isn't going to come back to bitcoin and use one

of those EVM contraptions that got stapled to it. they're not going to

sit around and wait for drivechains to exist. they already left the room

and they already found something that is working for them. that also

goes for the developers. the people who are ruining bitcoin have

actually driven away all the competent developers who are capable of

inventing an original scaling solution for bitcoin that doesn't

completely suck. that's why all you have right now is lightning and a

couple of guys who are trying to attach an EVM with duct tape and wood

glue. everyone else already took off. you are living in the aftermath of a brain drain agenda.

I heard they increased the chocolate ration to 13 grams