https://chrispacia.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/lightning-networ...
Hard, yes, but definitely possible. There was some great work done on P2P routing for Lightning by the developers at BitFury.
http://bitfury.com/content/5-white-papers-research/whitepape...
> We could end up making more on-chain transactions ... Well, it will have to close one of its existing channels. So the process for making a transaction when your wallet can’t find a route is: 1) Make an on-chain transaction closing out an existing channel. 2) Make an on-chain transaction opening a new channel with the payee.
This is not true. You can close an existing channel and open a new one in a single transaction.
> The vast majority of users will be offline.
Some will, some won't. Some will set this up on a VPS, some will use hosted services, some will be professional liquidity providers (early adopters with lots of coins?) that have a machine dedicated to this.
He's making a prediction that he cannot really support in any way.
> Channels cannot be created on-the-fly.
RBF is opt-in, only if you mark your transaction as such. If you don't want RBF, don't use RBF. His assertion that RBF is somehow required is not true.
> Recipients have to be online.
Yes, they do. This is perfectly fine for some use-cases, and not good for others. For use-cases where the recipient is offline, people can always resort to on-chain transactions.
I'm not sure what this has to do with hubs, though.
Basically, he's making tons of assumptions and guesses (some of them based on incorrect/outdated technical information). You should go and read-up yourself on the technology and the improvements the developers are coming up with.