<<  >> (p.5)
    Author Topic: i have proven the Lightning Network can't provide decentralized scaling.  (Read 2380 times)
    hv_
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2590
    Merit: 1055

    Clean Code and Scale


    View Profile WWW
    July 03, 2017, 11:28:12 AM
     #61

    RECAP :

    1) Jhonny (bless him..) posts his document telling us that LN won't work and that he has proven it mathematically.

    2) Bram Cohen (Inventor of BitTorrent) replies :

    Quote
    In this analysis nodes aren’t bothering to make sure that they have any connections at all. Shockingly, if a single node has no connections whatsoever then no amount of other connections in the system will make it routable. If instead every node enforce that it has at least three connections then these problems evaporate and everything works fine. I’m not being flippant here, this analysis really is that dumb.

    Also there’s nothing wrong with long routes. They settle out in the middle just fine, despite the author’s dismissiveness to the possibility that they can.
    This is not to say that a completely random homogenous network is an ideal or even necessarily a good way of setting up routing, but it works fine as long as every node makes sure that it has a minimal level of connectivity.

    3) Jhonny retorts :

    Quote
    Bram, are you sure you understand the article? “At least 3 connections” means you have to divide your money up “at least 3 ways”. With only 3 open channels, you’d be then relying on long routes which make actually getting your payment through exponentially less likely, as the math illustrates. Not sure what “settle out in the middle” means to you.

    4) Bram retorts :

    Quote
    ‘Settle out in the middle’ means using the smart transactions bit of Lighting so that there’s no lending happening in the middle. Maybe you should learn about how technologies work before posting tirades about them.
    As for your math, I can’t tell if you’re disingenuous or just stupid, but this is a very simple concept: The probabilities of different routes working aren’t independent of each other, because the target node will notice if they have no connections at all and form some, so if some routes don’t work that increases the probability of other routes working.

    If you assume that peers don’t make sure they have connections then your math is mostly correct, but your claim is that ‘lightning network can’t work’, not ‘lightning network doesn’t work with this asinine implementation I came up with’, which is what you actually showed.

    5) Jhonny fires back :

    Quote
    With all due respect, I believe it is you who is being “disingenuous or just stupid.” The target node cannot form new connections without doing an on-chain transaction, which defeats the whole point: Why not just send an on-chain transaction in the first place, without the LN.

    ....

     Roll Eyes .. as always.. please fasten your seat belt and make up your own mind.

    ps.. in 5).. Jhonny is saying that the fact you have to make a single on chain txn to start using LN (and then potentially do infinite txns), negates LN. I'm not kidding.


    Ouch - that (and more above) is killing LN.  I wait for first LN Fan Boy triade here wanting SW and LN work despite of this AND missing out any usual financial product disclaimer in case I might lose my bitcoin on that - nobody can tell there is 100% security on that - even bitcoin on-chain tx are not 100% secure but much closer to than  anything known yet.

    Carpe diem  -  understand the White Paper and mine honest.
    Fix real world issues: Check out b-vote.com
    The simple way is the genius way - Satoshi's Rules: humana veris _
Page 4
Viewing Page: 5