If you're currently whining about lightning's capacity and routing success in 2023, everyday bringing misery in every thread, I can't imagine what you did when lightning wasn't even 3 years old yet.

Brilliant comparison. Banks with millions of customers, billions in reserves, investing in all that infrastructure, managed to do 1 million payments in 3 months, in comparison with a non-sponsored, peer-to-peer network, whose success isn't incentivized by any company, and whose development was and still is voluntary. Not flawed at all.

Isn't it reasonable to make such assumption? Bring me the evidence that support otherwise then.

and another big step


https://twitter.com/BitcoinNewsCom/status/1618918198874882048

We must keep forgetting the part where you somehow got to determine what that looks like for everyone else.  Oh wait, you don't.  Go away, nazi parasite.

a. lightning network.. like avalanche network allows you to lock up bitcoin or litecoin.
so is avalanche "BITCOIN"?
nope.. avalanche is a different network. emphasise the word network beside the word avalanche proves its another network called avalanche
so is lightning "BITCOIN"?
nope.. lightning a different network. emphasise the word network beside the word lightning proves its another network called lightning

bitcoin never leaves the BITCOIN NETWORK

dont even try to suggest bitcoin leaves the bitcoin network, you are just fooling yourself and suggesting bitcoins security model is broke

(need me to list all networks that allow bitcoin to be locked on the bitcoin. and then using the UTXO as reference point on a different network???)
just because bitcoin has a lock... does not mean whatever subnetwork then uses the utxo as a value/funding reference is also a "bitcoin network" (see point (b) below)
(im surprised by now you snake oil salesmen phishing for brand recognition and faked trust and faked security co co-branding with mainnets. have not already tried to imply that because bitcoin (in your fantasy) can be moved to other networks.. but msats are not recognised or movable back to any mainnets that you then (in your fantasy) pretend that msat units are more secure than blockchain units) because they cant/dont leave lightning

b. lightning has no blockchain. has no decentralised consensus to keep nodes aligned to a specific ruleset and nor enforces a strict peg value, etc etc etc..

c. thor turbo has proved you can offer someone msats WITHOUT "locking bitcoin"
"leasing inbound balance" has proven you can have msats without you locking "locking bitcoin"(plus have no key control of those msat payments)

d. the LIGNTNING NETWORK emphasis network. can operate with multiple coins and is not reliant on bitcoin

e. avalanche has more bitcoin pocked to it than lightning does.. .. does this make avalanche "bitcoin" or is it just another subnetwork bridge (layer 2 crossborder platform)

f. those that say its a layer "ontop"
lets take some rational views.
first like domane names. the 'top level domain name' is not the brand but the directing master seed that routes to brands and sends the mas data to where it should
i know fangirls want LN to be this master thing.. much like the IMF is the master reserve for big banks and doesnt want to be considered as the underling network for giftcarsd below the 'be your own bank' EG the lower grade network like virtual visa that can process small pocket money amounts of multiple currencies

but lightning is an underclass network. it cant handle top end reserve amounts
it cant cope with anything more then ~$700 on average
it is not the IMF network. its the virtual visa network

now is visa called "dollar" or is visa just visa allowing processing movement of visa dollars. yep visa dollars are different to bank deposit savings dollars

g. as for the "rounding down"
rounding is for instance stripping prunning cutting the right side significant figures by 3 numbers

however most lightning wallets are not just doing that.
they are without any network wide protocol enforcing it. having other methods.. and most are using
/ 1000
guys what guys.

lets say if you were to round using the strip prune right side by 2 sig figs instead of 3
lets give it a try

8434747948  (right cut by 3)
8434747 notice the rest of the numbers stay the same

now notice trying it using a division method of less than 1000
lets say 500
i guarantee you that you are not going to get
8434747948  ("round by 500")
8434747474 (you hope that it just plays with the end 3 but by half the amount
instead you get
16869495.896

do you now see how math logic is that trimright(X,3)
is different than X/1000

and for emphasis
the1000 is not even an enforced rule
and it can be changed by any amount

so whether a lightning app does math logic code a "round down" properly by cutting away the right side by 3 or with the lazy bug causing1000

these can be changed to not be cut right by 3 or1000, but changed to anything..
meaning different nodes are not set in stone/hardrule protocol where an msat will always be 3significant figures to a sat
which is a bad conversion peg security for any financial system
there is no network strengthened rule set to abide by a set conversion rate
refer to(b)

h.
oh and the last funny.. by introducing RBF, your little crown have been snake oiling the flame by saying dont trist zero confirms relayed on the bitcoin network they re not settled they are not confirmed, blah
but you lot also want to say lightning zero-confirm commitments are to be trusted and are to be treated as being paid (facepalm for multiple reasons)

that's odd

Sweden is a curious case, one of the few EU countries to have:

• their own currency
• their own defence (i.e. weapons) industry
• home grown manufacturers (although slowly dying off still, Germany still dominates EU industry)

and Sweden also have a unique position in the EU: the only country living under "quantitative easing" and general Japan-style financial/fiscal insanity for multiple decades (not sure if Sweden started before even Japan did...)

so on a political level, the Swedish toying with any kind of cryptocurrency matter at the public level is going to make more waves than one might suppose

Someone of you, could please point me in the right direction to decrypt the following sentence:
"If Ordinals Protocol were used by the vast majority of users (wallets) it would break the LN routing".

What is the connection between the twos?
 

I hardly see how can be a problem for LN! On the opposite, this is a success story for this L2 solution! One of the main reasons for LN being successful is base layer space being filled up with high transaction fees!