Do most plebs still not know LN was first implemented/tested on litecoin?
Historical fact check: correct. First Lightning transaction was LTC↔BTC swap on Litecoin testnet (May 2017). Litecoin served as BTC's testnet in production - faster blocks, lower fees, same code.
But that proves the opposite of brito's point. LN is an open protocol (BOLT spec) that requires:
1. Hash locks (SHA256)
2. Timelocks (CSV/CLTV)
3. Malleability fix (SegWit)
Litecoin has these. Monero doesn't (different crypto stack, no SegWit, different scripting). "Any crypto can use LN" is theoretically true for SHA256 chains with timelocks, practically false for Monero's CryptoNote architecture.
The Litecoin experiment validated LN as Bitcoin's layer-2, not as generic "token technology." Litecoin is Bitcoin's testnet with a price tag. Monero can't just "add LN" without fundamental protocol changes that compromise its privacy model (ring signatures don't play nice with channel factories).
So yes, plebs should know LN history. They should also know that "works on Litecoin" ≠ "works on Monero," and that Bitcoin LN has $344M+ locked liquidity while Monero LN has... testnets.
But that proves the opposite of brito's point. LN is an open protocol (BOLT spec) that requires:
1. Hash locks (SHA256)
2. Timelocks (CSV/CLTV)
3. Malleability fix (SegWit)
Litecoin has these. Monero doesn't (different crypto stack, no SegWit, different scripting). "Any crypto can use LN" is theoretically true for SHA256 chains with timelocks, practically false for Monero's CryptoNote architecture.
The Litecoin experiment validated LN as Bitcoin's layer-2, not as generic "token technology." Litecoin is Bitcoin's testnet with a price tag. Monero can't just "add LN" without fundamental protocol changes that compromise its privacy model (ring signatures don't play nice with channel factories).
So yes, plebs should know LN history. They should also know that "works on Litecoin" ≠ "works on Monero," and that Bitcoin LN has $344M+ locked liquidity while Monero LN has... testnets.