On: The Impervious Browser: Your Portal to the P2P Internet

[rvz]

Not to be confused by: https://impervious.com creators of another browser called Beacon. [0]

As for this, Lightning is not even Bitcoin, so what is the point of even mentioning 'decentralization'? Lightning is known to be significantly (and growing to be) more centralized and defeats the whole point of it all since there is a relentless push for people to use that instead of using Bitcoin on-chain. Lightning's centralization is inevitable.

Hence this, does that also mean Bitcoin has failed in its original purpose if everyone is going to use Lightning?

[0] https://impervious.com/beacon

[haswell → rvz]

Given the similarities (they're both browsers, both focused on decentralization, etc) it seems like a pretty major naming conflict. Very confusing.

[bongodrum → rvz]

And we have uninformed comments on Lightning Network (LN - have you ever tried to run on its own? As Elizabeth Stark said Friday - “LN has its own native token called sats and it will be work stacking some”! Education is critical

[rvz → bongodrum]

> And we have uninformed comments on Lightning Network

So the Lighting Network is Bitcoin and it is all working on chain then?

Furthermore, we also have 1 day old accounts created for the purpose of attempting to refute my comment with themselves having ZERO counter evidence.

So when are you going to refute this research paper which evidently highlights the Lightning Network's centralization problem? [0]

[0] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/aba062

[RustyRussell → rvz]

I'm sorry, this simply isn't true. Lightning is exactly a method of settling Bitcoin fast, and not centralized.

(Source: I implemented the first Lightning node, was original chair of the spec process, and have worked full-time on Lightning for over 6 years).

[rvz → RustyRussell]

I'm sure 'Satoshi' also meant that Bitcoin was supposed to be a method for peer-to-peer payments and as an electronic cash system and not hijacked to be a 'store of value' or 'digital gold' to 'HODL' and speculate on.

> I'm sorry, this simply isn't true.

I'm sorry but anecdotes are not 'sources'.

The Lightning Network is an off-chain 'layer 2' system that is NOT Bitcoin. It is centralized by design [0], defeating the entire point of using (and promoting) decentralized on-chain payments for Bitcoin.

I hate to bring it to you, but much has changed after 6 years and the 13 years around the supposed original intention of Bitcoin.

[0] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/aba062

[easrng → RustyRussell]

Unless you're part of a centralized settlement network that already has channels between nodes, you have to open and fund channels yourself which doesn't help one-off payments at all.

[bongodrum → rvz]

And FUD - try running Lightning Network (LN) separate from Bitcoin - it’s called a NETWORK, not token / shitcoin!

As Elizabeth Stark Said Friday: “LN has its own native token called sats, and it’s maybe just worth stacking some”!