Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by littlecranky67 125 days ago
You mistake is, you overestimate the amount of people who want to be self custodial. You don't need to onboard every human being in the world on-chain.
1 comments

Given the US example that would be several years in the absolute best for lightning case to onboard even 5% of individuals. Lightning is doomed from the start.

And if you don't care about self custody then the overhead of using a blockchain is a waste.

It is not black/white. It is okay to have the freedom to become self-custodial anytime, but not everybody needs to transact in self-custody all the time.

Taproot was another major step that enables lightning upgrades in future versions (such as zero-fee channel opens) that is barely discussed. The number of X years for onboarding Y amount of people is not accurate, as it disregards all major developments of the last 5 years.

You need enough users for providers to bother making it an option to pay with so it really is black and white. You might get a few niche providers offering it as a payment method without a critical mass of users but most companies aren't going to invest time and effort into implementing a payment system a tiny percentage of users have access too and if I need to trade money with my friends the low % means that in the vast majority of cases they aren't going to have lightning available either.
All you are saying is a chicken and egg problem of adoption - nothing todo with the technology itself. Adoption IS growing, so we will see.