THELOGICALINDIAN - Written by Jonald Fyookball
A few months ago, I wrote an article called “Mathematical Proof That the Lightning Network Cannot Be a Decentralized Bitcoin Scaling Solution”. It accustomed absolutely a bit of attention, both absolute and negative.
Now it seems that the realities of LN’s limitations are actuality accepted, and new narratives are basic to absolve the connected morphing of Bitcoin into a adjustment layer.
For example, actuality is a Reddit chat that took abode a few canicule ago. Our adversarial acquaintance u/benjamindees seems to acknowledge that the Lightning Network will await on ample centralized hubs, but argues that this is no worse than ample Bitcoin nodes:
To comedy devil’s apostle with myself for a moment, the altercation goes like this: “Large, big-ticket Bitcoin nodes are aloof as bad as ample LN acquittal hubs. A ample miner could adjudge to not accommodate your transaction in block aloof as a acquittal approach could adjudge not to avenue your payment.”
To that, I would say…
A ample miner (or alike a majority bunch of miners) cannot finer abridge your transactions, because ANY miner can accommodate your transaction in a block.
But the aforementioned is not accurate for LN hubs. They can effectively abridge your transactions, because NOT any hub can avenue your payment. (If you accept a set of bill in one specific channel, it has to be baffled application that channel)
Just to analyze (because I apperceive addition will booty this out of context), I’m blank the bearings area a mining bunch refuses to let others abundance blocks with unwinding (re-org) attacks.
We can cautiously avoid this bend case because it would either annihilate Bitcoin as we apperceive it anyway, or it would be met with a user activated fork.
In added words: as continued as re-org attacks aren’t consistently happening, some miner will eventually accommodate your transaction in a block and no one can stop that.
Continuing with the devil’s apostle argument, you ability say “It doesn’t amount if a Lightning hub won’t comedy nice. You aloof debris to use that hub, or if you’re already there, abjure your money and use a altered hub.”
But remember, LN is not permissionless.
The botheration isn’t necessarily you award a censorship-free hub, but rather actuality able to avenue your acquittal to others who haven’t.
Example: Megabank “A”, “B”, and “C” all adjudge to become Lightning Hubs. They all access barter and accept channels accessible amid the 3 banks. This allows barter from any of the banks to accelerate money to added barter of those 3 banks.
You, actuality a freedom-loving individual, adjudge to accessible a approach with an bearding hub accepted alone as T35G7. Guess what. Megabanks A, B, and C don’t appetite to accessible a approach with T35G7. So you can’t accelerate to any of their barter back there’s no accessible route.
I anticipate it would alone be a amount of time afore the arrangement either avalanche into complete censorship, or fractures. Even if you accept the probabilities of these outcomes are small, it should be advised a deal-breaker.
Bitcoin is about banking sovereignty.
You accept a appropriate to privacy.
You should be accustomed to do whatever you appetite with your money as continued as you’re not affliction addition else.
You shouldn’t be advised like a criminal. And you shouldn’t accept to abide your claimed advice and accept your affairs tracked by a bank, a government, or anybody else.
Bitcoin is inherently aggressive to bread-and-butter censorship. Governments cannot force miners to aggregate your AML/KYC advice because users will accept to bypass it, and addition miner will consistently be there to put your transaction into a block.
Miners are the ones authoritative Bitcoin accessible by accepting the arrangement through a Proof-of-Work algorithm.
The abstraction that you can accept a censorship-resistant arrangement because of bags of bodies active absolutely validating, non-mining nodes on Raspberry Pi’s doesn’t accomplish any sense.
Only mining nodes can put your transaction into a block!
But systems like the Lightning Network are awful accessible to bread-and-butter censorship. That’s one of the big affidavit we adios the adjustment band archetypal and adopt our Bitcoin to be Peer to Peer Electronic Cash.
Written by Jonald Fyookball
Jonald Fyookball (pseudonym) is a cryptocurrency enthusiast, best accepted as the activity baton of the Electron Cash wallet, and for a alternation of adamantine hitting accessories on the Bitcoin ascent debate. Jonald is a computer scientist, businessman, investor, libertarian, and Bitcoin advocate.
Do you anticipate Lightning Network Centralization Leads to Economic Censorship? Share your thoughts in the comments area below!
This is an Op-ed article. The opinions bidding in this commodity are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com does not endorse nor abutment views, opinions or abstracts fatigued in this post. Bitcoin.com is not amenable for or accountable for any content, accurateness or affection aural the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due activity afore demography any accomplishments accompanying to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, anon or indirectly, for any accident or accident acquired or declared to be acquired by or in affiliation with the use of or assurance on any advice in this Op-ed article.
Images address of Shutterstock
At news.Bitcoin.com all comments absolute links are automatically captivated up for balance in the Disqus system. That agency an editor has to booty a attending at the animadversion to accept it. This is due to the many, repetitive, spam and betray links bodies column beneath our articles. We do not abridge any animadversion agreeable based on backroom or claimed opinions. So, amuse be patient. Your animadversion will be published.
