pull down to refresh
42 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 20 Apr \ parent \ on: Let's talk real: did you have to pay for on-chain transactions post-halving? lightning
High fees were expected. Is a natural evolution of Bitcoin.
The thing is that if we could find a way to limit these force closing channels, we could have a pretty solid payment network to use.
The high fees to open a channel are not such a big deal. people will get used to open once in a while a big channel and use it endlessly.
The real big problem is that you get force closed for various reasons, without consenting to it and you cannot do anything to stop it.
One thing is to get a coop close with a peer, because he have some technical problems and is announcing you to close his channels and another thing is to get a force channel because some dude in the jungle was running a shity node and your tx was passing through and get stuck, triggering a force close.
I hope soon we will have some good upgrades on LN implementations that will limit at minimum these force closures.
reply
Dealing with an inadvertent force close from a couple weeks ago and I have no idea when I'll be able to reopen.
reply
reply
Main problem they have is that the one that paid the highest price gets the rune, so there is an evil incentive to increase more and more the fees.
Currently, the number of tx in the mempool is not excesively high, under normal circunstances we would have like 70sat/vbyte with these numbers. Problem is this fucking incentive to pay more and more.