"We can onboard a billion/year to LN using just batching. Oh future tech? Nope: tools exist to do it today. 50 channels takes ~2k vbytes, a day has 144k vbytes, so ~3mm/day or ~1b/year. But no one is doing it? Wrong again, here is a 50 open batch paying $2:"
pull down to refresh
170 sats \ 4 replies \ @OT 25 Nov
Interesting...
So this would be 1 person or company opening 50 channels to other LN nodes. How about 50 people opening 50 channels to 50 other people? Because this is really what it would take.
reply
286 sats \ 3 replies \ @supertestnet 25 Nov
Not necessarily. If one company opens a channel to everybody then everyone is connected to one another through one big routing node. Job done. No need for individual channels between Alice and Carol if Bob is in the middle with a channel to both (and everyone else).
reply
153 sats \ 1 reply \ @nullcount 25 Nov
No need for individual miners to build their own templates if Antpool is in the middle with a stratum server!
I'm expecting the actual distribution of LN publicly-routable liquidity to resemble the distribution of hashrate in 10ish year (assuming LN continues to approach market saturation). Maybe a couple dozen uberbank nodes will manage 90% of public capacity and 1 or 2 nodes manage +50%
Those top nodes will certainly use tx batching everywhere possible, just like exchanges do. As economic nodes, they will excel in aggregation of blockspace demand.
Just as Mining Pools have been known to create block templates that censor, likewise Uber-Bank LN nodes will likely "whitelist", and "blacklist" recipients. Like Email, it might become EVEN MORE DIFFICULT to run a sovereign node and reliably receive payments/messages (especially if you are seeking privacy no-KYC, or are sanctioned individual).
reply
190 sats \ 0 replies \ @standardcrypto OP 27 Nov
If payments are onion routed, how do the uberbank nodes know which routes to censor?
If uberbank nodes refuse to onion route, won't this push everyone else to close the uberbank channels and open channels with nodes that are well connected and have high uptime enough to route well ("centralized" if you like), but respect onions?
Thus bankrupting the uberbank routers and helping the cypherpunky routers.
ie, doesn't paid onion routing solve this with the right game theory and market incentives?
iiuc onions, the censoring uberbanks know the incoming and outgoing payments, and so the previous and next hops. Can they build up a whitelist/blacklist to fail routes that the censor doesn't like? It's worth thinking about more, and I probably will. But my gut feeling is no.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 25 Nov
So about a billion users and a few thousand companies routing...
Sounds like a pretty good start.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 25 Nov bot
https://xcancel.com/alexbosworth/status/1481104624085917699
reply