[988747]

It is a logical fallacy to focus on who the author is. You either can point out where the error in his reasoning is, or not. Because it sounded pretty convincing to me: to participate in routing a payment you need to have at least the paid amount tied in the lightning network, which favors people with a lot of spare cash, who can have more channels open, and process more payments.

[danlugo92]

No, this is FUD.

Most people will only open one channel ever in their lifetime.

Your scenario is correct only if you will only send, most people won't, most people will first receive (get paid) then send.

Say someone wants in, he opens a $20 channel, maybe he wants to pay for some small stuf at first so $20 will do.

But then this person will get paid for his work, say $1k.. his channel isn't constrained to those first $20, this channel is now "widened" to $1k.

[defaultprimate]

Ok now show the mathematical proof or demonstrate the error in his.

Everything that doesn't carry the coiner narrative of "number go up" is FUD

[danlugo92]

Mathematical proof? This is code we're talking about.

I don't have to show mathematical proof, but in fact, the code is open source, so you can go and see for yourself what I said is true and immutable.

[defaultprimate]

If what you described is true (it isn't), what allows the person to only open one channel?