They solve a lot, that's for sure. They solve the immediate issue with fees as well as the clogging of the main chain, which in a sense can be seen as analogous to "censorship" or "monopolization" of the network. But they don't safeguard against future social issues amongst developers, nor does it go far enough alone in restoring the features found in the original Bitcoin.
So even if Legacy found a way to implement Lightning in a manner that most Cash users would agree with, it still wouldn't make Bitcoin Cash as such a redundant implementation.
Unless they can find an alternative for segwit that fixes malbilty issue the lightning network can't be used or they add segwit then that another story....
Did you mean to suggest they can or "can't"? Either way, they shouldn't add it as it is designed currently, to overtake transactions from the main chain.
I don't think most developers are "looking" for bigger blocks. Some of them obviously are putting together papers in a counter propaganda attempt, but that's not all or even most of what is happening. =)
They solve a lot, that's for sure. They solve the immediate issue with fees as well as the clogging of the main chain, which in a sense can be seen as analogous to "censorship" or "monopolization" of the network. But they don't safeguard against future social issues amongst developers, nor does it go far enough alone in restoring the features found in the original Bitcoin.
So even if Legacy found a way to implement Lightning in a manner that most Cash users would agree with, it still wouldn't make Bitcoin Cash as such a redundant implementation.
Unless they can find an alternative for segwit that fixes malbilty issue the lightning network can't be used or they add segwit then that another story....
Yeah, that's what I'm getting at.
Bitcoin cash won't add segwit. But if they can find an alternative to segwit that fixes malbity issues they can't add lightning network. And at the current rate most of the bitcoin cash developers are looking for finding even bigger blocks. https://news.bitcoin.com/7-million-transactions-a-second-research-paper-declares-1tb-blocks-feasible/
Did you mean to suggest they can or "can't"? Either way, they shouldn't add it as it is designed currently, to overtake transactions from the main chain.
I don't think most developers are "looking" for bigger blocks. Some of them obviously are putting together papers in a counter propaganda attempt, but that's not all or even most of what is happening. =)