pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @d01abcb3eb 31 Oct \ parent \ on: Giacomo Zucco: “Bitcoin Core won’t kill Bitcoin, but Arkade will change the LN” lightning
Unilateral exits cannot depend on LN, at least not with the current theory and implementation. Unilateral means without the help of the ASP, in which case you can only interact with the blockchain. Unilaterally exiting with small amounts doesn't make sense, analogous to how claiming too small on-chain HTLCs (where the fee exceeds the HTLC value) after channel closures doesn't make sense.
I think it's not only about affordability, but also about convenience. I'm looking forward to see how stuff develop, but will wait to play with it until it works a bit better. Atm it looks like arkade.money does not work in Tor browser, for instance.
I'm also curious to see what growing pains will appear, numbers on fees for users and on operating costs, and how different ASPs can interoperate.
Unilaterally exiting with small amounts doesn't make sense,
Agreed. But tell that to the poor Ark users that can't afford a LN channel.
Remember? They got into Ark because of wrong marketing that they do not need LN liquidity management....
Let's be clear: IF YOU CAN AFFORD A LN CHANNEL, ARK IS TOTALLY USELESS.
That means, why not just accumulate enough sats in whatever (even) custodial or friend's LN bank, until you can afford to open a damn LN channel and be happy ?
Ark will fail exactly for the same liquidity is accused today LN...
reply