[mikegreenberg]

> However, I didn’t see any talking points in your list that could not be addressed by building solutions to improve UX.

These things are problem with the protocol specification. I'm curious to know how you can solve things like without reducing the value proposition of Bitcoin being trustless and permissionless and Lightning being a fast settlement layer for daily transactions.

- Removing the pain of settling twice on-chain with an unpredictable cost. The best I can think of is to create some fund which amortizes the channel handling cost across all users. Which means you're sacrificing permissionlessness to whatever is doing the amortization of fees.)

- Fixing routing and the convergence of the network toward a hub-and-spoke shape. (This is bad because Bitcoin is suppose to be trustless/permissionless...if you need to trust a hub node, then you're getting all of the negatives and none of the positives.)

- Fixing the dust attack that HTLCs enables. (Context for others: HTLCs are a critical piece of the Lightning network protocol and is what enables channels to be created/destroyed at all.)

I understand the point you're trying to make but I disagree with your analogy. Linux is not being advertised to the masses as safe and easy to use like LN is.