And it's even more complicated than that, because you'd have to take the data from every node, and reconstruct complete paths to identify a single transaction.
And yes, I personally use the Strike app + Fold app to collect satoshi rewards by buying gift cards for shopping. Strike also has a beta app that uses lightning as the rails for global p2p transfers, e.g. you can instantly send USD to EUR. https://twitter.com/JackMallers/status/1346867753253220356
I was trying to figure out the same thing a month back[0], but most of the responses I got boiled down to "you're asking the wrong question". It's hard to wade through the crowd of "it's just digital gold", but the best response I got[1] is that it works decently for places that accept it, but there are hiccups, usually around liquidity.
Each channel accommodates theoretically infinite amount of transaction.
https://store.blockstream.com/
https://acceptlightning.com/list.html
Several major exchanges have announced that they are implementing LN support. Still very early days.
As always, call me when I can buy a latte with it.
You can buy a Starbucks gift card on fold app using LN and currently get 3% back in sats.
But seriously, why would anyone spend a ton of effort right now integrating a coffee shop directly with LN in the first world? Traditional payment systems work fine. Bitcoin was never primarily concerned with replacing Visa. Think bigger.
In such cases, there is no reason such users can't "enter" bitcoin through a second layer such as the Lightning Network.
Why would they do that if it isn't real bitcoin?, you might ask. Well, for one, their local, tin-pot-dictator created currencies are often worthless, meaning that even second-layer bitcoin is a far more sound and reliable currency.
And who is to say $40 for an on-chain transaction is an "egregious fee"? It turns out having access to the world's most secure, decentralized, unstoppable, set-in-stone, uncensorable, trustless, non-inflationary monetary network is a valuable thing. Maybe so much so that $40 per on-chain transaction is a bargain in the bigger picture.
Yes there is they need a channel, which costs $20 to open and $20 to close.
> And who is to say $40 for an on-chain transaction is an "egregious fee"? It turns out having access to the world's most secure, decentralized, unstoppable, set-in-stone, uncensorable, trustless, non-inflationary monetary network is a valuable thing. Maybe so much so that $40 per on-chain transaction is a bargain in the bigger picture.
Ah you're a comedian too!
No, they don't need to open a channel via the blockchain. They can have an account with a third party, for example.
And again, keep in mind we are talking about access to money -- a money that cannot be debased -- for those people living in the poorest and most terribly governed areas of the world, where debasement, hyperinflation, and the utter destruction of savings is commonplace.
Even if they don't get the full benefits of on-chain bitcoin transactions, they will still be light years ahead of where they were relying on failed local currencies. A massive improvement even in the worst case scenario, helping to lift real-world folks out of poverty. This is something to applaud and cheer for, not shake your head at or mock.
I was referring to the idea that a $40 channel fee might be palatable or even negligible for folks such as those in Malawi whose GDP per capita is $400 per year.