As far as I know this has nothing to do with iOS. It's because you're registered custodian therefore you have to be licensed as a money transmitter and do all kinds of retarded things like KYC even though Bitcoin is supposedly not money.
Primal opted for doxxing users and no wallet choice in exchange for post-specific Zaps.
Damus opted for wallet choice in exchange for Zapping users rather than posts.
Both on iOS. Subject to the same Apple policies. This is why I see it as less of a messenger issue, and more of a design decision that has trade-offs that could be seen as antithetical to monetary freedom.
nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 you’re a smart guy. Am I wrong that this was a design decision and that those trade-offs were known in advance?
Discussion
I’ve been told that Strike’s solution was required rather than a NWC option for the reason you specified…
but that this requirement was triggered due to Primal’s choice: linking the Zap with the Note itself—classified as an in-app purchase (rather than a donation)—so this triggers the Money Services Business rules you mentioned, on iOS. Damus got around this by not linking the post to the Zap (so the transfer is a donation rather than a purchase).
If that’s true. I believe Primal should do what Damus did, because of the privacy tradeoff. That’s my main point.
Maybe Primal is not changing this because Note Zapping:
1. metrics have utility
2. enable future functionality (maybe future Zap-to-unlock content).
3. it’s too cumbersome to change
Or maybe they have an exclusivity with Strike. idk, the reason doesn’t really matter.
I just don’t want to see a bunch of new users get doxxed when they don’t have to. I actually like Strike and Primal, this isn’t coming from a bad place.