It may seem like it will cause inconvenience to especially Lightning Network node operators, and general use of the chain for, you know, on chain payments, but the price of data on chain is really really low.
The fees paid for ordinary transactions will have to rise in order for these users to get prompt clearance of their transactions, and we can already see that, despite the seemingly low price and tight margins of mining, there is more hashpower on the chain than ever before.
Miners making more money is a good thing, because it means they will sell less of their mined coins than they did before.
And it will also help direct more attention to the Lightning Network, where the fee rates on chain have very small impact on the overheads for paying with sats, and will help build the momentum towards widespread adoption of LN for commerce.
When the blockchain got saturated with transactions back in the last bull market in late 2017-2018, prices for simple transactions went up to near $20 in fiat value just for a simple transfer. This made it highly impractical to use for commercial transactions. But with LN, this pretty much doesn't matter.
So, I for one welcome the Ordinal Inscriptions craze. Driving LN adoption and adding more support to the bottom price of Bitcoin is good for Bitcoin.
"People are RETARDED" - Osho https://youtu.be/QFgcqB8-AxE
reply
What do You think will be the outcome?
reply
It will just fad, slowly, in time. Happen the same many times before, this is not the first time people trying to put shit on the blockchain. People love to make noise about this crap.
reply
Think so, yes. Thanks for Your view.
reply
That sounds reasonable. The only thing is that fees for opening LN channels might become a little too high, and when LN explodes, many, many channels will need to be opened.
reply
It's already got enough liquidity to handle quite a substantial rise in usage. The ongoing work by Lightning Labs with Pool, and Breez's LSP protocols is moving towards a situation where the number of channels and their added transaction capacity will drive the ratio down so that it doesn't matter so much.
Sure, DIY node running is gonna be more complicated but at the same time, if you trust your counterparties well enough and they have been reliable you don't need to put any tx's on chain. Improvements in the protocol will likely make this even better over time.
I was just reading about "sidecar channels" before, which are built on top of other channels. I'm sure by the time we see $20 bitcoin transaction fees again this will not be a problem for LN's capacity to cope with an influx of new users.
reply
37 sats \ 1 reply \ @ama 2 Feb 2023
Yes, it has a lot of liquidity, but new people joining won't be able to use any of it, but will need to open their on channels, unless they go custodial, that is.
Sidecar channels sound good, yes, let see when they're ready...
reply
In many cases protocols that use LN micropayments under the board, there can be multiparty escrow schemes that enable users to pay via external channels (including custodial) that allow the purchase of vouchers for service, without the friction of waiting for their own channel to open to get started. It has other sticky issues, like how to automate that process, but I know for sure at least some LN wallets can be controlled using an API, closing the loop.
reply
no they aren't, period.
reply
Very thoughtful take right here.
reply
no thought required for shitcoin nonsense.
reply
no thought required for shitcoin nonsense.
BTC and Crypto enthusiast.
šŸ¤”
reply
what precisely are you confused by?
reply
"and Crypto". But hey, almost all of us where there, took me 10 years to figure it out. Finally being able to write shitcoin code and seeing the toxic culture inside the development organisations and then the collapse of Terra/Celsius/etc shook me out of it.
I'm sure you'll get there eventually. Bitcoin's the only legit project out there, and it's problems needing solving are the most worthwhile, and among the most challenging.
reply
Yawn. You assume a lot. I have lost nothing on shitcoins. Sorry you fell for yield games and stablecoins.
reply
No, I was writing the code, not speculating. "yIeLdS" - nearest I got to that was putting my bitcoin up for margin lending on Bitfinex just before the hack on cryptokitties. I lost my bitcoin because I was margin trading and the exit panic the hack prompted. Previous success in 2008 with USD/EUR forex trading made me try to do it but in the end the volatility was wider than required for the strategy that worked on forex.
There isn't many other ways to interpret "and Crypto" than that you have some assets tied up in altcoins. I will admit I am not totally hostile to Monero but it is the simplest privacy coin protocol and has acquired a great deal of users on the dark web, similar to how the first bitcoin marketplace of any size was there. But IMO, LN is going to replace it there, when the privacy side of things is fully nutted out. And things like trustless escrow on LN.
Ordinals and simply a weak attempt by shitcoiner to remain relevant by spamming bitcoin with jpgs - it will die a slow (hopefully fast) death just like like other such bad ideas like nfts and shitcoins.
reply
as soon as it dies down, its back to the same fee market.
reply
Bitcoin builders are only going to get louder and I'm super excited about it.