[beefield]

Do I understand it right that if I want to purchase some pizzas over time that pay 1 BTC each, I make an account with the pizzeria where I put 10 BTC that I own, each time I buy a pizza, the transaction is added to the lightning ledger, and if one of us wants to settle the thing for whatever reason after four pizzas, a transaction is transmitted to blockhain where I get 6 BTC back and pizzeria gets 4?

I do not quite see how that increases the real world capacity by orders of magnitude. I mean if we assume that people actually spend their money to quite a few different places and everyone would require a significant overhead of a single transaction to be committed for unspecified time. Further, it requires a minimum of two transactions on the blockchain fore each lightning ledger, so if I buy pizza today, and need to close that ledger to buy a sandwich tomorrow, that brings three transactions to blockchain. Of course, you can optimize this, but still, orders of magnitude sounds optimistic.

[flashdance]

You wouldn't have a self contained lightning channel with every single merchant that has to be settled individually. I'm not sure what makes you think that, as my last post describes why the lightning network has "network" in the name.

I recommend you read the summary on lightning.network.

[beefield]

Ok. I am not sure if I still understand completely, but there is a possibility that that could solve the scalability issues technically.

The issue it does not solve, though, is the volatility.

[flashdance]

Yeah the volatility is a huge problem right now, agreed! There's a lot of greed, too. It reminds me of 2013, but worse.