Create account

replied · 93d
What do you mean ? You can't add inflation on LN because it's linked to the main chain and everyone has the whole blockchain to verify that
replied · 93d
https://news.bitcoin.com/proposal-to-increase-bitcoins-21-million-supply-sparks-debate/

Some BTC supporters understand so little about economics that they've already proposed it
replied · 93d
The whole point of the LN is that people won't deal with real BTC coins.
Anyway, aren't you supposed to be anti-BTC and pro-BSV? I think you forgot to read your propaganda memo...
replied · 92d
Lightning BTC are real BTC. Liquid BTC aren't. The whole point of Liquid is what you said. It isn't true for the LN
I'm paid to be an sv shill, not to be anti btc
replied · 92d
With the LN not every coin is equally valuable, some are well connected, some are in contracts without channels in high demand, unlike the BTC coins which are all equal.
Exactly. Don’t you have to exchange your btc for L-btc? Liquid btc? After majority btc are exchanged it will be time to increase the 21 million limit. Just like printing fiat system.
replied · 92d
For LiquidBTC that is correct. You have to trust they (the 23 (I think) exchanges responsible of Liquid) won't scam you. It isn't correct for LN because the cryptography can't scam you
replied · 93d
...to attempt to add some kind of Liquid-like printing-coins-out-of-thin-air-solution in order to save their shitty, failed second layer
replied · 93d
He's saying the easiest way to solve the issues with LN right now would be to print coins. Core devs are already talking about lowering the cap to 300kb, they might be dumb enough...
replied · 92d
Lowering the cap isn't that dump I think but even if they propose an increase of the 21 limit it won't be accepted I think (and they would have to hard fork maybe)
replied · 92d
Lowering the cap to 300kb is extremely dumb given current usage levels. It would cause a dump comparable to early 2018, the fees would be absurd