LN Payouts On Ocean Pool? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

601 sats \ 11 comments \ @siggy47 11h bitcoin_Mining

I (finally) got my LN payout linked for the Ocean mining pool. I'm wondering how it works. There is no detail on the web site. Is there a minimum threshold before payouts, and what is it?

Is it customary to open a channel to Ocean? It isn't suggested anywhere on the site, and an Amboss search didn't turn anything up.

view all related items

36 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullama 3h

Is there a minimum threshold before payouts, and what is it?

It seems to be implied that there's no minimum with lightning. It says that they will try to pay with lightning every time, and if it fails, it will retry. If you get the on-chain minimum (0.01 BTC approx) it will be paid on-chain.

Apparently every time a block is found on the pool it tries to pay.

Note: You must ensure that you have one or more Lightning channels and the necessary inbound liquidity to receive payments, otherwise payments to you will fail.

https://ocean.xyz/docs/lightning#blog-bottom_post

36 sats \ 9 replies \ @fiatbad 8h

Is it customary to open a channel to Ocean?

I don't think there are any "customs" with regards to the Lightning Network.

Opening a channel is entirely up to you. You pay a single on-chain fee now in order to save Ocean from having to pay 5 Sats every time they send you a payment. It probly costs about 500 Sats to open a channel now. So, it will take about 100 transactions to justify the channel cost. (500/5 = 100).

Wait a minute. It just occurred to me that when you open a channel to them, 100% of the liquidity will be on your side of the channel. So, they won't be able to make payments to you on that channel until you spend an equal amount of Sats ON that channel (to move liquidity to their side). In other words, opening a channel to them is useless until you rebalance or spend.

It also just occurred to me that my entire comment is pretty much just rambling and offering no value. If you're new to Lightning, I probly just confused the shit out of you, and if you're not new then I just bored you with shit you already knew.

22 sats \ 8 replies \ @siggy47 OP 8h

I enjoyed monitoring your brain working in real time! I didn't like the choice of the word "customary" either when I wrote it. Yes, there would be no liquidity on their side, which I thought of. I have enough incoming anyway for the anticipated tiny payouts coming from them (until I build my giant farm😀). The problem is the node I'm using is small, with only private channels, and I'm worried about the payments finding a route. The point might be moot, since they don't seem to list an identifiable lightning node, which I guess means they're not looking to get inundated with tiny channels being opened.

36 sats \ 7 replies \ @fiatbad 8h

On my node, I have a large channels open to merchants, friends, and family that I have set up on their own self-custodial nodes. Most of the liquidity for these is on my side, but it allows the external world to connect to them without them having to worry about liquidity issues. I manage it, and it's only a handful so it's not hard.

Then, I have a few other very large channels open to major central hubs. Payments through such hubs never fail. I receive my mining payouts through them, and they usually stay relatively balanced because I'm constantly spending and receiving.

Critics of LN say that it centralizes to these hub-and-spoke models. They're correct, and it sucks.

However, I'm connected to a handful of such "hubs". No single one has total control. Half of the hubs I connect to are on the other side of the planet. So, even with this hub-and-spoke model, it's 100x better than the current banking systems. I'm still self-custodial, and I have options if one of them decides to turn into a bad-actor or becomes state-captured. LN critics grasp at straws. LN is baddass.

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @siggy47 OP 8h

Your node sounds almost exactly like my LND node, which I have had going for about 3 1/2 years.

I just started messing with a small CLN node, and coincidentally that fits best with Ocean. I'm also trying to connect my CLN as an external SN wallet, but I haven't managed that yet.

36 sats \ 5 replies \ @fiatbad 8h

Why does the underlying Lightning implementation matter when it comes to which mining pool you use? Genuinely curious, cuz you probly have a good reason.

Nodes don't know whether their peers are using LND or CLN.... do they?? Does this matter? Just trying to learn.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 OP 8h

I don't know the answer. I didn't think it mattered either. With Ocean, you need to set up a Bolt 12 offer, and the CLN gui allows you to do that. Still, I don't see why they don't think LND will work. Here's a quote from their site:

Due to our use of Core Lightning (CLN) and the experimental nature of BOLT12, it is best to use CLN as your node. At the time of writing, only CLN is known to work, but we will update this documentation as more compatible implementations of BOLT12 become available.

It doesn't make sense to me as long as you have Bolt 12, but I'm certain they know more than I do.

view all 4 replies