[fraggle222]

>but it's also desirable to be able to instantly transact a payment of $0.0001 without everyone in the world processing that payment.

I think there is a feeling (rightly or wrongly) in the community that LN is being sold as the future of bitcoin, and that this is not just about sending $.0001, but sending pretty much any amount. And there is concern, fear, etc that LN is one not ready yet, might have some issues we haven't uncovered, may be preventing us scaling in other ways, and may lead us to a bitcoin world we didn't sign up for.

>are using LN as some kind of punching bag

So yes, those concerns about the direction of bitcoin will lead people to beat up on LN, but mostly because there are strong champions of LN stoking those fears/concerns in some ways.

Probably if it was perceived in the community that the future state of bitcoin, was a really good combination of LN plus what we have today (on chain txs unrelated to LN settlements) then there would be less concern and divisiveness. Then it would be clear we have to grow/scale both parts. LN would be a nice solution to some use cases, and on chain bitcoin would need to scale to meet those other use cases (as well as support LN).

[josephpoon]

I agree wholeheartedly, all aspects of scalability needs to be (are being) looked at, with an eye for practicality. Hopefully, LN will reduce the load on-chain for people currently using bitcoin for instant low-value transactions as well by using LN and freeing up some blockspace.

[mrblockchain]

When is the white paper going to be finished?

What's the business model for the company you are forming around LN?