Good morning Thomas, > "big to-network channel" > > nit: should this be "big from-network channel" ?
As Lightning Network channels are bidirectional, it would be more properly "to/from-network", but that is cumbersome. "to-network" is shorter by two characters than "from-network", and would be true as well (since the channel is bidirectional, it is both a "to-network" and "from-network" channel), thus preferred. > > thanks for this explanation. You are welcome. Regards, ZmnSCPxj > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 11:45 PM ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev > [email protected] wrote: > > > Good Morning Mr. Lee, > > > > > I cannot front up funds of my own to give > > > them inbound balance because it would consume all of my treasury to lock > > > up funds. > > > > This is not a reasonable assumption! > > Suppose you have a new hire that you have agreed to pay 0.042BTC every 2 > > weeks. > > On the first payday of the new hire, you have to have at least 0.042BTC in > > your treasury, somehow. > > If not, you are unable to pay the new hire, full stop, and you are doomed > > to bankruptcy and your problems will disappear soon once your cut-throat > > new hire cuts your throat for not paying her or him. > > If you do have at least 0.042BTC in your treasury, you can make the channel > > with the new hire and pay the salary via the new channel. > > At every payday, you need to have at least the salary of your entire > > employee base available, otherwise you would be unable to pay at least some > > of your employees and you will quickly find yourself with your throat cut. > > Now, let us talk about topology. > > Let us reduce this to a pointless topology that is the worst possible > > topology for Lightning usage, and show that by golly, Lightning will still > > work. > > Suppose your company only has this one big channel with the network. > > Let us reduce your company to only having this single new hire > > throat-cutter (we will show later that without loss of generality this will > > still work even if you have thousands of throat-cutters internationally). > > Now, as mentioned, on the first payday of your throat-cutter, you have to > > have at least the 0.042 salary you promised. > > If you have been receiving payments for your throat-cutting business on the > > big channel, that means the 0.042 BTC is in that single big channel. > > You can then use an offchain-to-onchain swap service like Boltz or Loop and > > put the money onchain. > > Then you can create the new channel to your new hire and pay the promised > > salary to the throat-cutter. > > Now, you have no more funds in either of your channels, the to-network big > > channel, and the to-employee channel. > > So you are not locking up any of your funds, only the funds of your > > employee. > > Now, as your business operates, you will receive money in your to-network > > big channel. > > The rate at which you receive money for services rendered has to be larger > > than 0.042/2weeks on average, otherwise you are not earning enough to pay > > your throat-cutter by the time of the next payday (much less your other > > operating expenses, such as knife-sharpening, corpse disposal, dealing with > > the families of the deceased, etc.). > > If you are not earning at a high enough rate to pay your employee by the > > next payday, your employee will not be paid and will solve your problems by > > cutting your throat. > > But what that means is that the employee salary of the previous payday is > > not locked, either! > > Because you are receiving funds on your big to-network channel > > continuously, the employee can now spend the funds "locked" in the > > to-employee channel, sending out to the rest of the network. > > This uses up the money you have been earning and moving the funds to the > > to-employee channel, but if you are running a lucrative business, that is > > perfectly fine, since you should, by the next payday, have earned enough, > > and then some, to pay the employee on the next payday. > > Of course there will be times when business is a little slow and you get > > less than 0.042/2weeks. > > In that case, a wise business manager will reserve some funds for a rainy > > day when business is a little slow, meaning you will still have some funds > > you can put into your to-network big channel for other expenses, even as > > your employee uses capacity there to actually spend their salary. > > It all balances out. > > You only need to keep enough in your channels to cover your continuous > > operational expenses, and employee salaries are operational expenses. > > Suppose you now want to hire another throat-cutter. > > You would only do that if business is booming, or in other words, if you > > have accumulated enough money in your treasury to justify hiring yet > > another employee. > > By induction, this will work regardless if you have 1 employee, or 1 > > million. > > Regards, > > ZmnSCPxj > > > > bitcoin-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
