Even with the very low fees we now have on BCH, there is no need to do EVERYTHING on-chain. Very small txs are impractical even with 1 sat/B fees.
Imagine the LN, if nobody ever dreamed of using it for moving more than a couple of cents. There would be no liquidity issues, ever. Anyone with $10 could be a "liquidity provider"...High-degree, high-liquidity hubs would be far more decentralized. You wouldn't need watchtowers, since the risk of channel theft would be meaningless when channels contain just cents.Now couple that with low on-chain fees, so channels could be opened and closed much more easily and frequently, and the risk/liquidity barriers become quite negligible.LN has limited use-cases, but is not inherently flawed. I hope we will have it on BCH one day, because here it can actually work!
It is inherently flawed on a ***crippled blockchain***
Ok, turns out we do agree! I thought you were aiming at LN in general, but you did say "LN on BTC"...
Interesting view. I'm starting to think more positively about LN.
LN is good for nano/micro-payments on non-limited blockchain.
The Coretard LN project is pure retardation.
