Author: Daniel Newton 2015-10-14 23:42:31
Published on: 2015-10-14T23:42:31+00:00
The argument can be made that blocking or enforcing fee collection from entities that operate off chain transactions, such as changetip, coinbase, and bitstamp, is probably impossible. However, these entities still have to settle on-chain eventually. There is a debate about whether the Lightning Network (LN) will lower fees for on-chain transactions or not. Paul Sztorc believes that LN transactions are a substitute good for on-chain transactions, so demand for on-chain transactions will decrease, leading to lower fees. On the other hand, LN transactions cannot take place without periodic on-chain transactions, so they are also perfect compliments. The demand for all Bitcoin transactions, including LN and others, is affected by innumerable factors, one of which is the question of which form of money trading partners will use. Supporting a higher rate of higher-quality Bitcoin transactions may increase trading fees. S7r agrees with this theory that if Bitcoin transactions demand grows high enough to need the lightning network, there should be plenty of on-chain transactions for miners to collect fees from. However, the incentives of everyone involved in the lightning network, such as payment channel endpoints, hub operators, and miners, have not been fully seen yet. It might make sense to enforce a percentage of the fees collected by payment hubs to be spent as miner fees, regardless of whether the transactions from that hub go on the main chain or not.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T00:11:56.828281+00:00