> you can't collect analytics on which IP address submitted a Bitcoin transaction
> in many (most?) cases that’s obviously not true
Really? Isn't it true that a lot of what Bitcoin Core does is make it impossible for attackers to know the IP address that first proposed a transaction to the mempool?
most Bitcoin transactions aren’t submitted via Bitcoin Core or a self-sovereign node, hopefully that’s obvious
Right. Bitcoin transactions can be submitted by Coinbase or any other company that does KYC, etc.
But, with a bit of effort, you can self-custody and submit privately. Same with Lightning -- you can spin up an Alby Hub, on your own machine, open your own channels, etc. -- thousands of people do this.
Just With Spark, you cannot submit a transaction privately -- you don't have that option. You need to use their API. There's no way to interact with the protocol in a private manner.
Again, maybe that's fine for certain kinds of users.
I’m sorry but that’s forever going to be a minority of people so in the meantime there’s a lot of work to do in terms of mitigating privacy compromises involved by interacting with 3rd party services.
RIght. One good way to do that is not point users toward permissioned APIs controlled by one family, a family that also specializes in KYC, compliance, and related crap. The idea that Wallet Of Satoshi thinks they are going to use Spark and call it "non-custodial" -- while allowing LightSpark to track all their users -- is just insane. There is going to be hell to pay when LightSpark's regulator realizes that the "self-custodial" thing is a sham and demands to KYC all Wallet Of Satoshis users. What a mess.
I still see you mixing up privacy and self custody. I think it makes no sense at all.
So something like Spark, in your view, has some privacy tradeoffs, but is real self-custody, as long as they publicly release software which allows you to "get out" of Spark, onto the mainchain, without needing a 3rd party (in this case Lightspark), to do that operation for you. Right?
Yes, having unilateral control of your funds is self custody.
Now with Spark there are some caveats to this but it has nothing to do with the wider privacy conversation.
Sure. If Spark releases software that anyone can run, that does not "phone home" to LightSpark.com, and allows me to exit out of their ecosystem onto onchain Bitcoin, that does seem at least fairly close to "self custody".
BTW -- I think Ark should think about this, and when you are ready to go consumer-facing, be proactive about showing that anyone can run and endpoint, and it's totally possible for someone to interact with Ark without touching Arkade's domains. Even if you have a couple small-time operators stand up the service, make it available on their domains, that would be huge.
Self custody has no concept of privacy. By your standards most people self custodying are not actually self custodying. This does not align with reality.
Unfortunately you don’t seem to understand how these systems work. We have docs if you’re interested.
Got it! Still hoping that Arkade finds a way to be decentralized....
