I removed "You have". Now it's all in one sentence -- less ambiguous and more concise I believe. The more verbose alternative would be:
>You have *time* until ...
You are right [Umar](@bolatovumar) , I have not found a single source on the web with _two-of-two_, _2-of-2_ seems to be the standard. I edited my pull request, so now the changes do not include 2-of-2 modification. I find the issue of '2-of-2' vs 'two-of-two' interesting and may soon create a question on [English Stack Exchange](https://english.stackexchange.com/) in order to get their opinion.
It would be well to maintain consistency in spelling out the numbers (provided that they are not code/math/ BTC amounts) that are < 10. I left out "chapter 6" and the like unchanged.
[A post about style][1] for the reference.
>In scientific and technical writing, the prevailing style is to write out numbers under ten. While there are exceptions to these rules, your predominant concern should be expressing numbers consistently.
[1]: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/when-to-spell-out-numbers/
**Changes:**
* Added some missing full stops.
* 'meaning a pre-defined process based on cryptography, used by the channel partners to re-distribute' to 'meaning a pre-defined process based on cryptography is used by the channel partners to re-distribute'
* 'Payment channels basics' to 'Payment channel basics'
* 'Channels partners can agree to announce' to 'Channel partners can agree to announce'
* 'don’t need to trust your channel to retrieve the balance of your channel' to 'don’t need to trust your channel partner to retrieve the balance of your channel'
* 'present a Lightning invoice to Alice as a QR code, or send it via email, or any other message channel' or 'present a Lightning invoice to Alice as a QR code, send it via email, or any other message channel'
* 'who just sent her an uninvitedly email' to 'who just uninvitedly sent her an email'
* 'addresses as part of payment channel on the Lightning Network' to 'addresses as part of payment channels on the Lightning Network'
* 'We looked at how payments are routed. Finally, we compared Lightning and Bitcoin and analyzed their differences and commonalities' to 'We looked at how payments are routed and finally, we compared Lightning with Bitcoin and analyzed their differences and commonalities'
Incorporated some edits from the defunct pull request below to make this section read a little more easily. Some particulars
* Instead of stating as good way, bad way, ugly way -> state as their technical name and put (the good way) bracketed after
* The first and third examples referred to "you" and the second referred to "Alice and Bob". All three now refer to "you"
* Each paragraph now describes the method with a one liner
* Some miscellaneous detail
https://github.com/lnbook/lnbook/pull/307
