The more Iread of these ‘innovations’ the more pessimistic I become about the western ability to reason anything anymore.

I think the other answers to a good job of looking at the specific pro’s and con’s. Instead I just want to emphasise the one big, overarching, all encompassing con. Whatever innovation we place on top of the blockchain we are still merely attempting to catch up with traditional database architecture in terms of speed.

Fundamentally a distributed network without overall which spans the internet will always be slower and use resources less efficiently than a centralised and tightly controlled network doing the same job.

Whatever so called innovations we place on top of it this will be the case. In the case of Lightning network my question would be - what constitutes this second layer? A centrally controlled database of some form? For this is the only way in which the basic blockchain idea can be sped up. Some form of ‘off chain’ storage. ‘Off chain’ which basically means in a normal database. Why, why, why? This is supposed to be a blockchain tech. There are supposed to be advantages to blockchain. Keep going down that road and we come back to the real question - why the hell are we using blockchains in the first place?

The answer to that is nobody really knows. There are currently zero good reasons to use a blockchain over a traditional centrally controlled database architecture. The very existence, the very fact there is a need for lighting network shows that the whole idea of blockchains are fatally flawed. It is a tacit admission of failure and defeat. In the end we will come full circle, back to where we started.

This is the con everyone should be thinking about.

Let me your your thoughts on this.

And by the way, in terms of the Advancement of lightning technology, it is important for companies to illustrate on the need so that people won't have a headache of transferring BTC to other wallets with MAX FEE.