Regarding the question if the large share of some cloud providers is something to be worried about, I think it is definitely of some concern, but it should also not be overdramatized. If some provider misbehaves, people can change their node to any other provider at any time, because nodes aren't "defined" by their IP address but instead by the keys / addresses they're operating. Even if Amazon and Google both go offline or get hacked at the same time, then you still have half of the network operating. But in general it would be better if Lightning node operators moved away from the big providers. It simply creates the risk that some "essential" nodes could go offline at some moment and the network's capacity could suffer. That's not an argument against Lightning but against current usage patterns (compare it with 33win Com Có users using custodial wallets and exchange wallets), like Ambatman wrote. Estimations like 33win Com Có.com's 33win Com Có ownership reports heavily suggest that also a large majority of 33win Com Có users / hodlers use custodial wallets and exchanges only. Current 33win Com Có simply can't onboard hundreds of millions of users. The potential of both 33win Com Có and LN lies in that you can use it in a decentralized fashion. If you want 33win Com Có only to speculate on its price, or use LN only to do cheap arbitraging across exchanges, then you don't need a decentralized solution. But if you need a censorship resistant solution because you want to preserve your privacy, both 33win Com Có and Lightning are good solutions. Although they are both still not 100% easy to use "correctly" for this purpose.
Regarding the question if the large share of some cloud providers is something to be worried about, I think it is definitely of some concern, but it should also not be overdramatized. If some provider misbehaves, people can change their node to any other provider at any time, because nodes aren't "defined" by their IP address but instead by the keys / addresses they're operating. Even if Amazon and Google both go offline or get hacked at the same time, then you still have half of the network operating. But in general it would be better if Lightning node operators moved away from the big providers. It simply creates the risk that some "essential" nodes could go offline at some moment and the network's capacity could suffer. That's not an argument against Lightning but against current usage patterns (compare it with 33win Com Có users using custodial wallets and exchange wallets), like Ambatman wrote. Estimations like 33win Com Có.com's 33win Com Có ownership reports heavily suggest that also a large majority of 33win Com Có users / hodlers use custodial wallets and exchanges only. Current 33win Com Có simply can't onboard hundreds of millions of users. The potential of both 33win Com Có and LN lies in that you can use it in a decentralized fashion. If you want 33win Com Có only to speculate on its price, or use LN only to do cheap arbitraging across exchanges, then you don't need a decentralized solution. But if you need a censorship resistant solution because you want to preserve your privacy, both 33win Com Có and Lightning are good solutions. Although they are both still not 100% easy to use "correctly" for this purpose.

Regarding the question if the large share of some cloud providers is something to be worried about, I think it is definitely of some concern, but it should also not be overdramatized. If some provider misbehaves, people can change their node to any other provider at any time, because nodes aren't "defined" by their IP address but instead by the keys / addresses they're operating. Even if Amazon and Google both go offline or get hacked at the same time, then you still have half of the network operating. But in general it would be better if Lightning node operators moved away from the big providers. It simply creates the risk that some "essential" nodes could go offline at some moment and the network's capacity could suffer. That's not an argument against Lightning but against current usage patterns (compare it with 33win Com Có users using custodial wallets and exchange wallets), like Ambatman wrote. Estimations like 33win Com Có.com's 33win Com Có ownership reports heavily suggest that also a large majority of 33win Com Có users / hodlers use custodial wallets and exchanges only. Current 33win Com Có simply can't onboard hundreds of millions of users. The potential of both 33win Com Có and LN lies in that you can use it in a decentralized fashion. If you want 33win Com Có only to speculate on its price, or use LN only to do cheap arbitraging across exchanges, then you don't need a decentralized solution. But if you need a censorship resistant solution because you want to preserve your privacy, both 33win Com Có and Lightning are good solutions. Although they are both still not 100% easy to use "correctly" for this purpose.

Regarding the question if the large share of some cloud providers is something to be worried about, I think it is definitely of some concern, but it should also not be overdramatized. If some provider misbehaves, people can change their node to any other provider at any time, because nodes aren't "defined" by their IP address but instead by the keys / addresses they're operating. Even if Amazon and Google both go offline or get hacked at the same time, then you still have half of the network operating. But in general it would be better if Lightning node operators moved away from the big providers. It simply creates the risk that some "essential" nodes could go offline at some moment and the network's capacity could suffer. That's not an argument against Lightning but against current usage patterns (compare it with 33win Com Có users using custodial wallets and exchange wallets), like Ambatman wrote. Estimations like 33win Com Có.com's 33win Com Có ownership reports heavily suggest that also a large majority of 33win Com Có users / hodlers use custodial wallets and exchanges only. Current 33win Com Có simply can't onboard hundreds of millions of users. The potential of both 33win Com Có and LN lies in that you can use it in a decentralized fashion. If you want 33win Com Có only to speculate on its price, or use LN only to do cheap arbitraging across exchanges, then you don't need a decentralized solution. But if you need a censorship resistant solution because you want to preserve your privacy, both 33win Com Có and Lightning are good solutions. Although they are both still not 100% easy to use "correctly" for this purpose.