His views on 0-conf and fees are orthogonal to a discussion on LN.

Address the issues around:

• How it will avoid centralization when the only likely working model will be hub and spoke.?
• Why transact on main chain at all if payment channels can be settled (effectively) channel to channel?
• How are routes going to be found in real time unless they are for common/recurrent payments?
• How are routes going to persist? Or should they? 
• How long will funds need to be tied up on main chain to support single/multiple channels?

 

All I'm saying is that bitcoin can be viewed as different things, depending the time you live in.

If you live in 1995, it could be "impossible"
If you live in 2015, it could be "problematic to scale"
If you live in 2035, it could be "fantastic"

...and the basic algorithm could be practically the same, the only thing that will have changed is the way the hardware and networks have gone upwards in capabilities by 1000x to 10000x.

So the problems are not necessarily "inherent" to bitcoin, but rather a result of a software-hardware-network ...equation.

Obviously, by improving the software right now we can do more with scaling. For example I was reading about ASICs doing the validation. Well, why ASICs and not GPUs for start? This should be relatively easy to port, with opencl and stuff - so it would allow cpu+gpu to be exploited for max performance. The processing part could take a boost there for sure because GPUs are much much faster.

As for storage, that's where we'll need a breakthrough I suspect. Compression will probably be one that gives serious gains (a simple gzip on a ~130mb block.dat takes me down to something like 100mb), but since CPUs are slow with the compression/decompression of large data sets, maybe it too should be given as a task to GPUs in multiple "blocks" of compressed data to exploit GPU parallelism. If a computer can handle compressed data with virtually no lag, then perhaps there can be a positive spillover effect to the network itself by the transmission of compressed data packages which are compressed/decompressed in realtime by the GPUs for near-zero lag. I think harnessing GPU power is definitely something worth exploring for future scaling, in more than one ways.

Then the author would have not mentioned it in a post about LN. Something is off.

Exactly. While there are some engineering challenges to be solved nobody informed is seriously concerned with path finding. Also people could develop their own version of LN with everything listed there being "fixed". That's where the problem lies. Most people in this community have no skills or skills that are mostly useless and thus we just see them make hyperbolic complaints (out of boredom maybe?).

I understand that and this discussion is useless to me, so there's no need to continue.

This must be a joke? Segwit is also needed for LN and it brings many needed fixes along with it. This is just an example. I don't see any proposal that is solely for LN and that has no other uses?

So your answer is ad hominem? Most people here have minimum IT knowledge and their concerns are often a waste of time and a result of listening to propaganda. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. You would just never admit it.

Bro, how can he not talk down to this ignorant community when the yokels refuse to deffer to his [albeit only self-proclaimed] expertise?
Do you even Gaem Theorie?

I haven't read yet about the connection of Blockstream and PwC. Are PwC financing Blockstream? If so then what's the problem? As long as the code is open source and they don't do stupid shit (like clearly becoming anti privacy like Bitcoin XT and so on) who cares the money comes from as long as it's used for the betterment of Bitcoin. I wish Jamie Dimon used his billions to fund Bitcoin development instead of being a dick.

The issue is you having the temerity to believe yourself qualified to comment on their level of knowledge.  You are attempting to defend a technical issue, but you come across as not having a clue.

Your "You dont understand it, let the 'informed' ones take care of it because technical" is annoying.

There is no issue and of course I'm qualified enough. You can take two different approaches here: 1) Look at studies that provide numbers of the general knowledge; 2) Asses the situation yourself. I don't have to defend anything and am definitely more informed than people of your caliber.

You've started trolling (i.e. breaking the rules). I have only had interactions with this developer a few times where he answered a few questions (which were often not directed at him). I barely use IRC on those channels (thus also trolling).

You're dealing with a guy who claims that theymos' unfinished 2+ million dollar forum software is better than SMF software in every respect. Not kidding.
Your logics have no power here.

You accused me of an ad-hom when calling you out for labeling anyone who questions core as an uninformed fool. Yet you still failed to adress any technical issues raised. I'd class responding to a post with less than usefull content as a form of trolling. Its a matter pf perspective.


I think this statement summarizes your attitude perfectly.