core VS Lightning-Network

Website: terra.money

TerraUSD (UST) was launched in 2020. Like NuBits and other seigniorage algorithmic stablecoins, UST sought to peg one token by moving volatility to a separate token, in this case LUNA, which was also the native token of the Terra blockchain. Users could swap 1 UST for $1 of LUNA and vice versa. When the price of UST rose above $1, holders could profit by swapping $1 of LUNA for 1 UST (which would be worth more than $1), increasing supply and pushing down the price of UST. When UST was below $1, users could profit by swapping 1 UST for $1 of LUNA, reducing the supply of UST. This worked relatively well until a series of events led to confidence in the system collapsing, meaning there was no longer adequate demand for LUNA to stabilize UST. Its failure in May 2022 wiped out tens of billions of dollars of value from the Terra ecosystem, catalyzed the wider crypto bear market, and brought down several large organizations with exposure to it, including crypto hedge fund 3AC and lending company Celsius in the process.

Terra's Official Twitter account post, a newly created account, and a bio that reads "Building a new standard for DAO on Terra"

A final example of a token is a "stablecoin". A stablecoin is a token which is kept by the issuer at a fixed price in terms of a government currency, generally the US dollar. Tether maintains a popular stablecoin known as USDT by keeping reserves matching the supply of the token. Other approaches include that used by MakerDao for its stablecoin Dai, where reserves are decentralized and take the form of tokens or Ethereum. These decentralized stablecoins are referred to as "algorithmic stablecoins". A more unfortunate example is Terra, who's algorithmic stablecoin collapsed to the tune of 60 billion dollars.

Terra

https://www.terra.money/ (this looks exactly like the above)

It’s also on their website https://www.terra.money/

The main problem in my mind with the Lightning network is that in order increase transaction speed, it is reducing the decentralization by requiring participants to trust the other network operators that they create channels with. For the lightning network to really scale to a global payment system, we would need large central hubs for the payments to route through and you would end up with a poor imitation of the centralized banking system that bitcoin is attempting to avoid.

This page is a good collection of issues and criticisms of LN: https://github.com/davidshares/Lightning-Network

Bitcoin specifically, transactions times and the layering, in essence the lightning network, has been a failure amid many embarrassing risks (some of which allowing for the possibility of a contract being intercepted). https://github.com/davidshares/Lightning-Network amounts to absolutely not being an effective currency system from the get go. An absolute waste of energy. Deflationary by design meaning a disincentive to sell baked into it. The volatile value means a completely undesirable means of exchange.

Lightning network is an off-chain L2 solution, not bitcoin. Also terribly unreliable and vulnerable: https://github.com/davidshares/Lightning-Network

The truth about the Lightning Network: https://github.com/davidshares/Lightning-Network

And I'm listing literally just a few issues. There's a more comprehensive list here.