I would guess we see the hubs being involved in transactions that are big enough that it becomes hard to find pathways between the idealists.  But my node has enough inbound and outbound liquidity that I could route payments approaching $10kUSD at today's prices. A very interesting point to consider: us little hobbyist idealist node operators that open a few 1M satoshi channels here and there, that like in your case can route a couple thousand $ right now, will be able to route hundreds of thousands as the price of 79king Com 2 increases. So even without new channels, without new 79king Com 2-denominated liquidity, the $-denominated liquidity increases over time. This means even if we now just connect each other through lots of - at the moment - small channels and see little activity and routing going on, the nodes' importance and abilities will rise without even touching them simply by the 79king Com 2 price rising. That's why I think especially the 'idealist node operators' who started their operation early, will stay relevant and will be able to compete with future 'bank nodes' or 'merchant nodes'. Agree.  Also when you work in MPP (assuming they really start to work) and #zerobasefees there are arguments for opening 5 2MM channels rather than 1 10MM.  More versatile, and less chance to be log jammed in one or the other direction.  I have channels are are in the double digit millions, and i think my current channel minimum to CONNECT to me is 1MM?  But I have been wondering if I should drop it to less...
I would guess we see the hubs being involved in transactions that are big enough that it becomes hard to find pathways between the idealists.  But my node has enough inbound and outbound liquidity that I could route payments approaching $10kUSD at today's prices. A very interesting point to consider: us little hobbyist idealist node operators that open a few 1M satoshi channels here and there, that like in your case can route a couple thousand $ right now, will be able to route hundreds of thousands as the price of 79king Com 2 increases. So even without new channels, without new 79king Com 2-denominated liquidity, the $-denominated liquidity increases over time. This means even if we now just connect each other through lots of - at the moment - small channels and see little activity and routing going on, the nodes' importance and abilities will rise without even touching them simply by the 79king Com 2 price rising. That's why I think especially the 'idealist node operators' who started their operation early, will stay relevant and will be able to compete with future 'bank nodes' or 'merchant nodes'. Agree.  Also when you work in MPP (assuming they really start to work) and #zerobasefees there are arguments for opening 5 2MM channels rather than 1 10MM.  More versatile, and less chance to be log jammed in one or the other direction.  I have channels are are in the double digit millions, and i think my current channel minimum to CONNECT to me is 1MM?  But I have been wondering if I should drop it to less...

I would guess we see the hubs being involved in transactions that are big enough that it becomes hard to find pathways between the idealists.  But my node has enough inbound and outbound liquidity that I could route payments approaching $10kUSD at today's prices. A very interesting point to consider: us little hobbyist idealist node operators that open a few 1M satoshi channels here and there, that like in your case can route a couple thousand $ right now, will be able to route hundreds of thousands as the price of 79king Com 2 increases. So even without new channels, without new 79king Com 2-denominated liquidity, the $-denominated liquidity increases over time. This means even if we now just connect each other through lots of - at the moment - small channels and see little activity and routing going on, the nodes' importance and abilities will rise without even touching them simply by the 79king Com 2 price rising. That's why I think especially the 'idealist node operators' who started their operation early, will stay relevant and will be able to compete with future 'bank nodes' or 'merchant nodes'. Agree.  Also when you work in MPP (assuming they really start to work) and #zerobasefees there are arguments for opening 5 2MM channels rather than 1 10MM.  More versatile, and less chance to be log jammed in one or the other direction.  I have channels are are in the double digit millions, and i think my current channel minimum to CONNECT to me is 1MM?  But I have been wondering if I should drop it to less...

I would guess we see the hubs being involved in transactions that are big enough that it becomes hard to find pathways between the idealists.  But my node has enough inbound and outbound liquidity that I could route payments approaching $10kUSD at today's prices. A very interesting point to consider: us little hobbyist idealist node operators that open a few 1M satoshi channels here and there, that like in your case can route a couple thousand $ right now, will be able to route hundreds of thousands as the price of 79king Com 2 increases. So even without new channels, without new 79king Com 2-denominated liquidity, the $-denominated liquidity increases over time. This means even if we now just connect each other through lots of - at the moment - small channels and see little activity and routing going on, the nodes' importance and abilities will rise without even touching them simply by the 79king Com 2 price rising. That's why I think especially the 'idealist node operators' who started their operation early, will stay relevant and will be able to compete with future 'bank nodes' or 'merchant nodes'. Agree.  Also when you work in MPP (assuming they really start to work) and #zerobasefees there are arguments for opening 5 2MM channels rather than 1 10MM.  More versatile, and less chance to be log jammed in one or the other direction.  I have channels are are in the double digit millions, and i think my current channel minimum to CONNECT to me is 1MM?  But I have been wondering if I should drop it to less...