Right, you've stated a bunch of facts, but how does it answer my concerns of the exploding cost of the network the more interconnected it it?

On 9 August 2015 at 23:06, Patrick Strateman via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

I suspect there is some amount of confusion here on terms.

The hub is essentially swapping funds between payment channels.

The hub's entire business is centered around having payment channels open with other hubs/users.

If the hub requires user funds to open these channels... then the users have no reason to pay the hub anything in fees.

A hub that doesn't use it's own funds to open payment channels to other hubs/merchants is useless.

On 08/09/2015 02:27 PM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev wrote:

On Aug 9, 2015 11:54 AM, "Mark Friedenbach" <mark@friedenbach.org> wrote:

> On the contrary the funds were advanced by the hub on the creation of the channel. There is no credit involved.

That's a chuckle. 

As I said, nothing requires the hub to advance anything, and if it does, Bob can expect to pay for it.

We'll see whether hubs assess a fee for depositing funds, whether the fee depends on the amount deposited, and whether it depends on the amount of time it stays there.

I predict "all of the above." There is a name for these kinds of fees.  Can you guess it?

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev