For ages, I've been trying to have a debate about #BCH "scaling" VS #LightningNetwork with someone technically knowledgeable, intelligent, and articulate.
I've failed in my search to find any #BCH supporter that fits one of those 3 requirements, much less all 3.
I've failed in my search to find any #BCH supporter that fits one of those 3 requirements, much less all 3.
All we get are "MORE BABIES ARE DYING"
And
"I have more money than your country!"
"F*** you toddler"
and a host of easily debunked propganda being spread by non-technical, individuals with no subject matter knowledge... (Or worse, they don't even know the meaning of the words.)
And
"I have more money than your country!"
"F*** you toddler"
and a host of easily debunked propganda being spread by non-technical, individuals with no subject matter knowledge... (Or worse, they don't even know the meaning of the words.)
So many with "Oh it's an IOU". No... Do you even know what that means?
"It's centralized" No... you clearly don't understand the meaning of centralized.
Etc Etc.
"It's centralized" No... you clearly don't understand the meaning of centralized.
Etc Etc.
Let's debunk some propaganda properly:
1: "#LightningNetwork" are IOUs: No, in no way, shape, or form are the transactions IOUs. The money you receive in a channel is under your complete control instantly. You may spend, or transfer back to the blockchain at your leisure.
1: "#LightningNetwork" are IOUs: No, in no way, shape, or form are the transactions IOUs. The money you receive in a channel is under your complete control instantly. You may spend, or transfer back to the blockchain at your leisure.
"But But... it's IOUs because they can be stolen"
Actually... because they can be stolen, this proves they are NOT IOUs.
Case in point, you get paid cash by your employer. A week later someone robs you at gun point and steals said cash. Did you go back to your boss and
/4
Actually... because they can be stolen, this proves they are NOT IOUs.
Case in point, you get paid cash by your employer. A week later someone robs you at gun point and steals said cash. Did you go back to your boss and
/4
/5
And say "Hey, I never received money from your IOU!"
And say "Hey, I never received money from your IOU!"
2: "#LightningNetwork requires 3rd party watchtowers."
Incorrect: Watch towers aren't required, ever. Just like life insurance isn't required.
Secondly, watchtowers don't have to be 3rd parties. They are simply a piece of software you can run on a device (other than your /6
Incorrect: Watch towers aren't required, ever. Just like life insurance isn't required.
Secondly, watchtowers don't have to be 3rd parties. They are simply a piece of software you can run on a device (other than your /6
/7
lightning wallet) that's always connected to the internet, possibly cellphone, home PC, leased server, etc.
Watchtowers are for the worse case scenario: Your wallet is offline for 3 days *AND* one of your counter parties is *extremely* technically inclined,
lightning wallet) that's always connected to the internet, possibly cellphone, home PC, leased server, etc.
Watchtowers are for the worse case scenario: Your wallet is offline for 3 days *AND* one of your counter parties is *extremely* technically inclined,
/8 *AND* the channel has less on your side than it did at some previous time, *AND* the person is malicious, *AND* the person is aware your node is down, *AND* person tries to steal your money via highly technical means.
Which is made further unlikely if they think you *MAY* have a watchtower, and lose *all* of their funds. You don't have to have a watch tower... Just the threat of one is sufficient in many cases.
/9
The dumbest thing I've heard is "#LightningNetwork is fractional reserve".
Clearly the person doesn't know what the phrase "Fractional reserve" means. This is completely impossible on bitcoin, on ANY layer.
The dumbest thing I've heard is "#LightningNetwork is fractional reserve".
Clearly the person doesn't know what the phrase "Fractional reserve" means. This is completely impossible on bitcoin, on ANY layer.
/10
"But but... It's CENTRALIZED!"
Clearly, you don't understand the definition.
Centralized: Have a central point of control and/or failure.
Lightning can *not* have these by design, so they are 100% decentralized.
"But but... It's CENTRALIZED!"
Clearly, you don't understand the definition.
Centralized: Have a central point of control and/or failure.
Lightning can *not* have these by design, so they are 100% decentralized.
/11
"Hubs can sensor transactions"
A: Absurd. Hubs have absolutely no knowledge of the source nor destination.
B: You can route around *easily*. This also applies to debunking the "centralized" propaganda.
"Hubs can sensor transactions"
A: Absurd. Hubs have absolutely no knowledge of the source nor destination.
B: You can route around *easily*. This also applies to debunking the "centralized" propaganda.
/12
"MORE BABIES ARE DYING"
This one is... Obvious lunacy. In no way, shape, or form are "Babies dying" because of bitcoin.
Ultra poor ppl whose babies are dying from complete lack of money... wouldn't have more food because they "have access to bitcoin".
"MORE BABIES ARE DYING"
This one is... Obvious lunacy. In no way, shape, or form are "Babies dying" because of bitcoin.
Ultra poor ppl whose babies are dying from complete lack of money... wouldn't have more food because they "have access to bitcoin".
/13
"F*** you toddler"
So, why does #Faketoshi wand to do such a thing to toddlers? Poor toddlers. :(
So, save the babies... F the toddlers? That's #Bcash's new motto?
"F*** you toddler"
So, why does #Faketoshi wand to do such a thing to toddlers? Poor toddlers. :(
So, save the babies... F the toddlers? That's #Bcash's new motto?
/14
"Routing is XYZ"
SMH: Ok, Routing is a solved problem, it's been solved for decades...
Ok, #LightningNetwork can *NOT* use the same type of routing as "the internet", because of it's random/changing partial mesh topology.
Good thing there are SEVERAL other solutions.
"Routing is XYZ"
SMH: Ok, Routing is a solved problem, it's been solved for decades...
Ok, #LightningNetwork can *NOT* use the same type of routing as "the internet", because of it's random/changing partial mesh topology.
Good thing there are SEVERAL other solutions.
/15
If you want to see other solutions, Check out your GPS... Or many... many... many video games with pathfinding.
The reason routing isn't in the white paper: Because there are MANY solutions to pick from... or even combine together. It's up to the Devs to decide.
If you want to see other solutions, Check out your GPS... Or many... many... many video games with pathfinding.
The reason routing isn't in the white paper: Because there are MANY solutions to pick from... or even combine together. It's up to the Devs to decide.
/16
"But blockstream and some cabal of XYZ own #LightningNetwork"
Some of these... are just head smackingly stupid.
Ok, First: @Blockstream isn't some evil secret organization out to take over the world.
Second there are multiple implementations of #LN.
"But blockstream and some cabal of XYZ own #LightningNetwork"
Some of these... are just head smackingly stupid.
Ok, First: @Blockstream isn't some evil secret organization out to take over the world.
Second there are multiple implementations of #LN.
/17
Third: Blockstream employees don't even have the majority of commits on any of the implementations, last I checked.
Third: Blockstream employees don't even have the majority of commits on any of the implementations, last I checked.
/18
"You still don't have enough on-chains to add everyone to LN"
Partially true, good thing we're not a one-trick pony. Multiple scaling techniques are in the works.
Whereas, ONLY increasing blocksize is guaranteed to collapse.
"You still don't have enough on-chains to add everyone to LN"
Partially true, good thing we're not a one-trick pony. Multiple scaling techniques are in the works.
Whereas, ONLY increasing blocksize is guaranteed to collapse.
/19
Any other propaganda floating around that I haven't debunked yet?
Liquidity: This is a legitimate issue, one that has many solutions in the works, and will create an eventual natural equilibrium.
Any other propaganda floating around that I haven't debunked yet?
Liquidity: This is a legitimate issue, one that has many solutions in the works, and will create an eventual natural equilibrium.
/2
Read up on AMP, Splicing, and Autopilot... and think about what happens when combine all three of these together. Liquidity won't be a long term problem.
Read up on AMP, Splicing, and Autopilot... and think about what happens when combine all three of these together. Liquidity won't be a long term problem.
/21
Please join me in shaming @NickSmithology for blatant plagiarism.
Please join me in shaming @NickSmithology for blatant plagiarism.
https://twitter.com/NickSmithology/status/1015149100394786816
/22
Here's another Incredibly stupid piece of propaganda:
"It's too complex, no one will use it."
Really? Then please explain to me, at a component level, how data is transmitted through your computer. What is a NAND gate? Transistor? At what voltages does your PC use inside?
Here's another Incredibly stupid piece of propaganda:
"It's too complex, no one will use it."
Really? Then please explain to me, at a component level, how data is transmitted through your computer. What is a NAND gate? Transistor? At what voltages does your PC use inside?
/23
"Complexity" is always hidden away behind a user interface.
99.999% of the population that use TVs, Cell phones, Smart phones, radios, cars, etc, etc, etc, have absolutely no idea how complex they are, nor have any knowledge of how they function. AND don't NEED to know.
"Complexity" is always hidden away behind a user interface.
99.999% of the population that use TVs, Cell phones, Smart phones, radios, cars, etc, etc, etc, have absolutely no idea how complex they are, nor have any knowledge of how they function. AND don't NEED to know.
/24
Back to Liquidity:
I forgot to mention, it's limited by design.
There are hard limits built into the code on some (if not all) implementations of #LightningNetwork, as well as guidelines from the devs suggesting only putting small amounts in each channel.
Back to Liquidity:
I forgot to mention, it's limited by design.
There are hard limits built into the code on some (if not all) implementations of #LightningNetwork, as well as guidelines from the devs suggesting only putting small amounts in each channel.
/25
"Bitcoin is slow, expensive, and unreliable"
No, It wasn't ever unreliable. When the blocks get full, it's on a sliding scale between slow and expensive. Nowhere on that scale is "unreliable".
In Nov/Dec I personally witnessed, via blochain explorer, a sustained attack
"Bitcoin is slow, expensive, and unreliable"
No, It wasn't ever unreliable. When the blocks get full, it's on a sliding scale between slow and expensive. Nowhere on that scale is "unreliable".
In Nov/Dec I personally witnessed, via blochain explorer, a sustained attack
/26
on the Bitcoin blockchain. Freshly mined Bitcoin would be sent to a new wallet, stay there for ONE block and immediately be sent to another new wallet. This process would repeat until the entire original balance was eaten in fees.
on the Bitcoin blockchain. Freshly mined Bitcoin would be sent to a new wallet, stay there for ONE block and immediately be sent to another new wallet. This process would repeat until the entire original balance was eaten in fees.
/27
Once blocks are full, this costs miners absolutely nothing to pull off... in fact it actually increases the profits.
Create a transaction with a fee set so low no other miner will pick it up. Flood the system with such transactions. Then use your miner to manually process
Once blocks are full, this costs miners absolutely nothing to pull off... in fact it actually increases the profits.
Create a transaction with a fee set so low no other miner will pick it up. Flood the system with such transactions. Then use your miner to manually process
/28 some of these transactions. The transactions are 'free' for the miner, but he also doesn't get paid for that block filled with his own transactions. BUT he's driven up fees by such a massive amount, it doesn't matter. The fees generated more than make up for the attack.
/29
Increasing the blocksize would have only made the problem DRASTICALLY worse. It would have had no effect on the attack, or the fees. In fact, it would make the attack MORE profitable.
With non-full blocks, it's much more expensive to get the attack started.
Increasing the blocksize would have only made the problem DRASTICALLY worse. It would have had no effect on the attack, or the fees. In fact, it would make the attack MORE profitable.
With non-full blocks, it's much more expensive to get the attack started.
/30
Currently, fees between #BCH and #BTC are about the same, as represented by their native token. And speeds are identical.
Currently, fees between #BCH and #BTC are about the same, as represented by their native token. And speeds are identical.
/31
"But 0-conf is instant and safe!"
A: Anyone can accept Bitcoin with 0-conf too. Soo... #Bcash doesn't win on that front.
B: 0-conf is *NOT* safe. 0-Conf is as safe as accepting a check without ID nor personal identifiers on the check. You have NO RECOURSE if it fails.
"But 0-conf is instant and safe!"
A: Anyone can accept Bitcoin with 0-conf too. Soo... #Bcash doesn't win on that front.
B: 0-conf is *NOT* safe. 0-Conf is as safe as accepting a check without ID nor personal identifiers on the check. You have NO RECOURSE if it fails.
/32
"Oh, we'll just change the name to "Verified" so people feel safer."
This is outrageously deceptive. "New and improved... Now contains Arsenic"
0-conf IS NOT VERIFIED. It's a RUMOR of a payment. Not even an IOU.
"Oh, we'll just change the name to "Verified" so people feel safer."
This is outrageously deceptive. "New and improved... Now contains Arsenic"
0-conf IS NOT VERIFIED. It's a RUMOR of a payment. Not even an IOU.
/33
Back to IOUs:
Let me make it *very* clear: At *absolutely* no point in time does anyone owe anyone anything during the creation, usage, or closing of a Lightning Channel. Funds are moved to a smart contract, and the smart contract dictates who has control of the funds
Back to IOUs:
Let me make it *very* clear: At *absolutely* no point in time does anyone owe anyone anything during the creation, usage, or closing of a Lightning Channel. Funds are moved to a smart contract, and the smart contract dictates who has control of the funds
/34
contained with in.
Anyone telling you (or trying to explain the #LightningNetwork) the funds are IOUs have a fundamental lack of understanding of what a smart contract is, and what an IOU is.
If something is stolen, it doesn't equate to having never been paid.
contained with in.
Anyone telling you (or trying to explain the #LightningNetwork) the funds are IOUs have a fundamental lack of understanding of what a smart contract is, and what an IOU is.
If something is stolen, it doesn't equate to having never been paid.
/35
If you reply to this thread with Meme propaganda or animated gifs, you will be blocked.
Use your own words. Be articulate. Look it up if you don't know what the word means.
If you reply to this thread with Meme propaganda or animated gifs, you will be blocked.
Use your own words. Be articulate. Look it up if you don't know what the word means.
Is there anything I missed? Anything need correction?
@ryanxcharles @r0bbot @Falkvinge @starkness @magicalcrypto @Excellion @SatoshiLite @fluffypony @WhalePanda @aantonop
@ryanxcharles @r0bbot @Falkvinge @starkness @magicalcrypto @Excellion @SatoshiLite @fluffypony @WhalePanda @aantonop
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
