this is stupid pedantry.
nobody means bisq or robosats when they refer to DNMs.
and YOU only get pedantic about it so you can claim there are DNMs that use LN
its not clever
just obnoxious.
Discussion
you rn
"BiSq iS oN ToR aND ItS a mARkET"
there 90 minutes of STNs pedantic quibbling on nostr:nprofile1qqsqxf440czzuzyjswddcumcg6yafpdll55958wvl6w94kk6g7dp6nqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuur0wf6x2mt0dejhymewvdhk6tcpzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezu7rdwgh8ymmrddej7qghwaehxw309aux6u3ww4ek2mn0wd68ytn0wfnj77a2vxg pod
if anyone can listen to him splitting hairs to rationalize his ideas for that long.
I encourage readers to listen to the podcast and draw their own conclusions
also this one with me and Luke Parker (monero dev): https://x.com/super_testnet/status/1824431745443279044
*encourages readers to 'draw their own conclusions'*
*provides a link to his own conclusions*
🙄
I don't 100% agree with Super on the Lightning vs Monero discussion but he's right here. They are absolutely DNMs.
They just aren't.
Its a very different thing from a LE perspective and the pressures on DNMs are vastly greater than on those DEXs.
Which is exactly why DNMs use a solution that provides good privacy out of the box (#monero) and not LN.
They also sometime still accept on-chain BTC. Either because they're stupid or because they KNOW the risks involved and flip it into monero anyway.
Either way, from their perspective it better than using something with unknown (and perhaps unknowable) privacy assurances.
it's cool that we have DEXs with LN integration but lets be real,
Bisq hasn't even been accepting LN for 6 mos yet,
and honestly how much total daily liquidity are we talking about and does anyone really care yet?
not equivalent threat models, therefore not DNMs.