• fernandu00
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yeah, if they used monero instead of lightning would be a better option for the user. Not a lightning fan. Layer 2 solutions seems a waste of time and money for me, lightning included…but well, that’s the result of the blocksize war.

    • makeasnek
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      You can either increase blocksize (and therefore decrease decentralization) or build L2s. Look at ETH with their big, frequent blocks. You can run a Bitcoin node on a 10 year old laptop, good luck running an Eth node with those specs. You need at least 1TB of space, and it’s gotta be SSD, and you need a pretty fast processor. Which is why many Eth nodes are hosted in corporate datacenters, over half the network. You can split hairs over what counts as a “node” etc but the end result is the same: increased centralization due to large chain size/requirements.

      Monero doesn’t need L2s yet because it doesn’t have the transaction load to fill up available chain space enough to impact decentralization. Long-term, we cannot store all transactions on every node and do that forever. Small txs do not belong on chain. I love XMRs approach to privacy, it will need L2s at some point. Or pruning, which comes with some significant tradeoffs.

      • fernandu00
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah you’re probably right about that, I’m no expert and this make a lot of sense …I hope to see XMR face this transaction load issue…that would mean more people using it