Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hggh 780 days ago
> I have been using Lightning Network and it seems to work all right

That won't last. As stated in the Lightning Network whitepaper [0], it will need much bigger blocks (it mentions up to 133MB) to scale.

[0] https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf
1 comments
npoc 779 days ago
Nah, channel factories solve that problem.

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/67158/what-are-c...

link
hggh 779 days ago
A new layer between the layer 1 and layer 2, sure...
link
npoc 779 days ago
Why don't you think it's possible?
link
hggh 779 days ago
It is possible, but absurd. Why more layers if layer 1 works fine just increasing the maximum block size? Bitcoin Cash did it and works flawlessly. Just try it.
link
npoc 778 days ago
It's called the blockchain trilemma.

Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation. It can still only manage 100 transactions/second so certainly isn't flawless.

Far better to make the base layer slow but very robust, and then add layers to scale.

link
hggh 778 days ago
> Bitcoin cash pays the price through centralisation

What centralization? If you are referring to the node implementations, it has several [0]: Bitcoin Node, Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Verde,... Bitcoin BTC has basically one: Bitcoin Core [1]. If you mean mining, it's the same as BTC, same mining algorithm, same miners.

> It can still only manage 100 transactions/second

True for now, but it's way more than it needs right now now [2]. But don't worry, this month upgrades to ABLA [3], and will be able to scale to as many tx/s as needed.

[0] https://bitcoincash.org/#nodes

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

[2] https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash

[3] https://gitlab.com/0353F40E/ebaa/-/blob/main/README.md

link