wrong, Lightning works great for clients and services... all but a few arbs will get rekt and rightly so

justin_shocknet

High fees and and hot wallet risks will force them to be profitable or the network dies...

nicosey

I'm not really sure we're disagreeing with each other. I don't even run a routing node. My node is not profitable, and I don't care. In essence, the point of my post is that nodes may become profitable over time whether that was the operator's intention or not.
Also, I'm not saying it's easy, but I don't think there should be any moral or ethical prohibition against striving to run a profitable node. 

Believing it and understanding it are different things. This has nothing to do with philosophy, it's a practical matter. 

Do you believe in free markets and not arbitrage? Care to explain why your routing node should be profitable when you have no moat? What is your value prop vs every other router on the network?

Again, if you expect to profit purely from routing, you're misinformed. 

Bitcoiners can believe in the free market, no? Bitcoin doesn't require us to be socialists, right? 
Should wallet devs be permitted profits for their hard work?  I would say node operators do take a risk. 
 Don't they have a right to seek compensation for that risk? 

siggy47

lightning

Will Pleb Hobby Lightning Nodes Be Big, Profitable Enterprises In The Future?

Nodes were never supposed to be profitable through routing, why should they be in a permissionless system where anyone can park capital with no risk beyond hot wallet risk? Where did this narrative come from?

Fees on Lightning are to make the system work, what you earn is only meant to offset what you pay.

If you expect to be profitable solely routing, you're misinformed. 

