This article is reproduced from DaPangDun's Mirror column, the original link: https://mirror.xyz/dapangdun.eth/NsO55zQJR0aTPLtK6cZQryD3BJw9C66YHNr_k-q3a7g
After the previous article analyzing Fiber technology, I still had some doubts, so I asked Jan for advice, and this article came about.
I have condensed this exchange into three keywords: Long-termism, Reciprocity, and Scenario Imagination.
Long-termism#
1. Lightning Network is a manifestation of long-termism in the payment field#
We often mention the Lightning Network, but how many people actually use it in the crypto world? Very few! And how many people have tried running a Lightning node? Even fewer!
In the current crypto world, there are many ways to make payments, and various public chains can accomplish this task. I believe that 90% of people use Tron more often than the Lightning Network, or even 95%.
Is it because the Lightning Network is not good?
Yes, the current Lightning Network, although it is satisfying to make instant payments with no delay and extremely low fees, is indeed not good enough. It has many problems, such as "liquidity management issues," "node maintenance difficulties," and "can only make BTC payments," etc. So it is understandable that many people do not use the Lightning Network.
However, if we look at the long term, the ultimate limit of all public chains today is likely to be close to the payment level of Alipay, while the Lightning Network theoretically surpasses this level by several orders of magnitude.
Therefore, long-termism means looking at this issue from a longer timeline, 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, or even further. We need people to continuously research, develop, and optimize technical solutions that may be suitable for the long-term future.
2. Persisting with P2P is a manifestation of long-termism#
Many services on the current Internet are based on a centralized architecture, and we are also very accustomed to this architecture. In the crypto world, this phenomenon also exists to a large extent, although we have been talking about "decentralization," but in many aspects, it is just talk.
For example, let's think about payments. Payments themselves are "value exchanges" between individuals. Why do we need an intermediary to complete them? Of course, you can find many reasons: good user experience, short delay, high success rate, etc. But these are not reasonable reasons to completely reject the P2P payment model because you will always encounter "specific scenarios" where P2P is needed, such as private transactions, off-chain transactions, customized transactions, etc., and these scenarios require P2P.
If we further imagine, with the development of technology and the development of machines and artificial intelligence, machines will surpass humans many times over in the future, and the future payment demand may not be between individuals but between machines. These machines, because they have the ability to perform off-chain calculations, are very likely to achieve specific interaction requirements through P2P payment.
Currently, "replicating chains is mainstream, and P2P is declining," but the evolution of technology is spiral, and the evolution of P2P is not over yet. It is worth exploring.
3. Fiber is CKB's manifestation of long-termism#
To be precise, Fiber's design is largely derived from BTC's Lightning Network, and the storage optimization introduced by the Daric framework is a small innovation. Its different technical characteristics mainly come from the CKB network itself. I have introduced the specific details in the previous article. Jan has his own considerations for this design: security, maturity, compatibility, etc.
What I am concerned about is: with so many PoW public chains, who is trying to build their own Lightning Network? Who is persisting with this P2P payment model? Therefore, Fiber is CKB's effort to adhere to long-termism.
Reciprocity#
1. Technical reciprocity#
Since there is already a Lightning Network on BTC, what is the significance of creating a Lightning Network on CKB? I believe this is a question that many people want to ask because the basic framework of Fiber is not much different from the current Lightning Network.
However, CKB network is different from BTC network. For example, the Eltoo solution cannot be implemented in BTC's Lightning Network currently because it requires a new signature mode, SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT, which needs to be enabled by a Bitcoin upgrade. On the other hand, CKB's programming model can achieve the SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT process from the beginning.
The ability of BTC Lightning is limited by the verification capability of the BTC mainnet. We can see what happens without restrictions through Fiber and then provide feedback to BTC Lightning.
Therefore, from this perspective, Fiber can play a role in testing the Lightning Network in advance.
2. Confidence reciprocity#
As I mentioned before, the Lightning Network is currently in a "frustrating period." You can see this phenomenon from the number of current nodes, the amount of BTC in the network, etc. It seems that the Lightning Network feels like it is being "slowly abandoned."
So, if CKB can build many Fiber network nodes, because Fiber is interoperable with BTC's Lightning Network nodes, it can provide confidence reciprocity to BTC Lightning to a certain extent and promote the development of payment channels and state channels together.
Scenario Imagination#
1. Brainstorming for long-term and short-term scenarios#
Including myself, most people are actually more concerned about what specific scenarios are. Without them, the Lightning Network will become a "geek's toy." So this is also the focus of my consultation with Jan. Jan believes that the Lightning Network's scenarios need to be thought about and built together. Of course, he also provides some short-term and long-term scenario examples:
For the short term, for example: solving the problem of vampire nodes, streaming media payments...
Regarding the long term, Jan gives an example: for example, in the future, every car will have artificial intelligence and offline computing capabilities. When driving on the road, a car can communicate with another car and overtake by paying through P2P... This is an interesting idea. Of course, it may not be perfect, and the future may not necessarily be solved only through the Lightning Network, but it can indeed inspire us in terms of building scenarios for the use of the Lightning Network.
In my opinion, the Lightning Network is suitable for scenarios that require "continuous micro-payments," and specific examples require continuous brainstorming.
2. One conceptual idea#
I actually have a conceptual idea: the combination of Fiber and DePIN.
First, let the user become a Fiber Lightning node, and then use some gameplay to make the user accept and gradually become accustomed to using Lightning payments. This gameplay needs to be combined with a special economic model and even sticky design.
This solution can instantly open up the imagination of nodes, and because it is interoperable with BTC Lightning, any DePIN device can provide assistance to BTC Lightning in terms of the number of nodes. Moreover, it is possible to connect several assets in the CKB and RGB++ ecosystems to form cohesion. Of course, this is just a preliminary idea with many imperfections, and it is only meant to stimulate further discussion.
Overall, Fiber is just a beginning in my understanding. There is still a long way to go in the future, and I hope it can go further and further.
📖 Recommended reading: