Fact that without off chain transactions, it's not ready for any more transaction volume and Lightning is still very much alpha at this point.

You don't see the instability, it's just people can't use it much more with the current implementation. Unstable future perhaps the parent meant.

> without off chain transactions, it's not ready for any more transaction volume and Lightning is still very much alpha at this point.

that's a pretty stable thing you're describing. and lightning is actually in beta now and has grown quite a bit.

> Unstable future perhaps the parent meant

the only stable thing about future is heat death of the universe. and even that is possibly up for debate.

shifting goalposts much?

This link is only 6 months ago. I don't know yesterday's state but I also don't know your definition of beta. I thought it meant quite ready for production use, just getting rid of corner cases.

https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/06/26/lighting-network-...

Yes, trying to send a transaction which is at or near the limit will result in it failing.

But that article doesn't mention that the limit is artificially imposed so that people aren't risking too much money on unproven code.

As the system is shown to be stable, that limit will be raised and eventually removed, and the issue here will no longer exist.

Plus, failure in this case means "using the blockchain", and for larger amounts of money the fees are generally a fraction of the amount transferred, even during times of high mempool.

Lightning network is not Bitcoin. I was asking what’s unstable about Bitcoin.