L2s that starve miners of fee revenue are completely unsustainable long term. "upgrades" are L1 consensus changes needed for creating different L2s, that cause miners to receive more fee revenue, or features like CTV that make L1 transactions more useful so more people will do them. miners will need to rely increasingly more on fee revenue and less on block rewards. the status quo of lightning, liquid, cashu, and arkade is not going to make that happen. they earn next to nothing from these. it's unsustainable. the scenario where extremely expensive lightning channel maintenance transactions are funding most of the hashrate is extremely bad for permissionlessness and freedom. it's bad for the user. so we need something different.

Replies (3)

This argument I can agree with. Though where the balance lies I'm not sure, as in can a lightning network that is sufficiently chatty with Bitcoin still be a healthy combo in the longterm? Dunno.
But if there's no traffic on the L1 then fees will fall and people will only use Arkade for low, value or time-sensitive transactions. Fees are something like 50c right now, so there is nothing stopping people using L1 for medium value, non-time sensitive transactions.
Large movements of money will always prefer L1 if cheap. There’s still 95% adoption left to go, I’m not too worried. However, I’m not sure how any of it reacts to breakthroughs in near free energy, personally.