<\/p>\n
- \n
- A core developer of the Lightning Network left, leading to discussions about the L2\u2019s sustainability.<\/em><\/li>\n
- When compared, the XRPL and Bitcoin Lightning Network have their ups and downs.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Bitcoin\u2019s [BTC]<\/span><\/a> Lightning Network has come under intense criticism lately. But is <\/span>Ripple\u2019s [XRP]<\/span><\/a>\u00a0Ledger (XRPL) network a higher-level scalable solution than the king coin\u2019s L2? This is one debate that has sparked different opinions online, especially on X (formerly Twitter).<\/span><\/p>\n
\nRealistic or not, here\u2019s <\/span>XRP\u2019s market cap in BTC terms<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n
\nBut across the far and wide viewpoints, there has been one that caught the attention of the market. This school of thought came from John. E. Deaton, and it could be worth examining.<\/p>\n
According to Deaton, who is a well-known supporter of the Ripple project, SpendTheBits, a digital payments platform powered by XRPL, was a better alternative to the Lightning Network<\/span>.<\/p>\n
\n
Let me be clear and transparent: I am now involved in @Spend_The_Bits<\/a> as an angel investor and serve as its Chief Legal Officer. Therefore, please accept my comments with that in mind. But a major reason I invested in @Spend_The_Bits<\/a>, or stated more accurately, invested in\u2026 https:\/\/t.co\/aheyTxjGxp<\/a><\/p>\n
\u2014 John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) October 21, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Lightning challenges end in a core departure<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/h4>\n
Deaton\u2019s point did not just come out of the blue. He was actually responding to the revelation that one of Bitcoin\u2019s Lightning developers had left the project. <\/span><\/p>\n
The core developer Antoine Riard, in his full <\/span>disclosure<\/span><\/a>, mentioned that his decision to exit was because of the high-security issues experienced by the network and has gone unsolved. He noted that,<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
\u201cI think this new class of replacement cycling attacks puts lightning in a very perilous position, where only a sustainable fix can happen at the base layer, e.g adding a memory-intensive history of all-seen transactions or some consensus upgrade.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
In recent times, the Bitcoin Lightning Network recorded an increase in adoption with the likes of Binance <\/span>integrating<\/span><\/a> it. However, Deaton believes that the cheap and speed feature of the network was nowhere near XRPL\u2019s SpendTheBits.<\/span><\/p>\n
However, the legal practitioner did not give cogent reasons other than the fact that he was an investor in the project. Hence, bias may not be a valid reason to dismiss the\u00a0Lightning Network\u2019s <\/span>capability<\/span><\/a>. Thus, a simple evaluation of both XRPL and the Lightning Network on-chain condition could give some insights into which is superior.<\/span><\/p>\n
Uneven distribution remains a cause<\/b><\/h4>\n
To assess the Lightning Network\u2019s capability, one metric to look at is the Gini capacity distribution. This metric is <\/span>calculated by comparing the actual distribution of Bitcoin capacity among the nodes to a hypothetical uniform distribution.<\/span><\/p>\n
With a value ranging from 0-1, the <\/span>Gini <\/span>coefficient<\/span><\/a> gives an insight into <\/span>t<\/span>he degree of centralization and potential risks associated with a highly concentrated distribution of Bitcoin capacity<\/span>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
![\"Bitcoin](\"https:\/\/statics.ambcrypto.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/glassnode-studio_bitcoin-lightning-network-gini-coefficient-capacity-distribution.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nSource: Glassnode<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Usually, values closer to 1 indicate<\/span> a more unequal distribution of Bitcoin capacity among nodes. Conversely, a lower Gini coefficient indicates a more even distribution of Bitcoin capacity. At the time of writing, the Bitcoin <\/span>Gini capacity distribution was 0.96 as displayed above.<\/span><\/p>\n
This jump seems to justify Riard\u2019s decision to quit, considering the high level of uneven distribution. But does that make XRPL better than the Lightning Network? Well, that could be a difficult conclusion to arrive at.<\/span><\/p>\n
XRPL is not entirely as white as snow<\/b><\/h4>\n
Looking at on-chain data again, but this time in XRPL\u2019s direction, Santiment <\/span>showed<\/span><\/a> that there has been an increase in the amount of trustlines created. Trustlines on the XRP Ledger are structures created for holding tokens only held by an issuer.<\/span><\/p>\n
While the hike may be impressive, the XRPL also had its own downside. This was because new assets issued on the ledger had been scarce for some weeks.<\/span><\/p>\n
![\"XRPL](\"image\/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns=\")
![\"XRPL](\"https:\/\/statics.ambcrypto.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/XRP-Ledger-XRP-09.10.44-22-Oct-2023.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nSource: Santiment<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n - When compared, the XRPL and Bitcoin Lightning Network have their ups and downs.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n