yes ^^
and ownership, accessibility, and self-custody are all different things.
Discussion
I would agree that at a granule view that is the case, yes
i think that's where the confusion lies
Not seeing what you mean
Still seems like lightning can't be self-custodied
*meow*
(while you hold btc in the lightning, "true" self-custody is more nuanced because of how ln channels work. you technically have control over the funds (open/close channels, manage txs, etc.), but there are risks and they are not fully liquid until settled on-chain.
you seem to have your mind made up about this; your refusal to "understand" points to the contrary of your belief leads me to believe you're looking for more of a debate than genuinely asking a question.)
:3
I'm not refusing to understand anything, you haven't explained a way lightning can be self-custodied
nostr:note10dwc6e455ef58khdfz2jxckknfpk3lymq3s385dg9xt47wu6ve4syw45uu
*meow*
How does running your own lightning node enable you to self custody lightning?
Do you also say running your own Bitcoin node enables you to self transact UTXOs as if the Bitcoin network isn't still required for valid transactions?
"How does running your own lightning node enable you to self custody lightning?"
because it gives you control of the funds without third-party services. you can open, close, and manage channels. final settlement occurs onchain so you keep your funds through the process.
"Do you also say running your own Bitcoin node enables you to self transact UTXOs as if the Bitcoin network isn't still required for valid transactions?"
requirement of an underlying network has no bearing on self-custody
^.^
"because it gives you control of the funds without third-party services."
How?
"you can open, close, and manage channels. final settlement occurs onchain so you keep your funds through the process."
None of this is explaining how you can hold the funds without third-party services
"requirement of an underlying network has no bearing on self-custody"
Did you misread "self transacting" as "self custody" or are you still just repeating your view without corroborating it? Where is the explanation of HOW requirement of an underlying network has no bearing on self-custody?
Thus, the Monero Bitcoin debate
As paradoxical as this might seem, you’re also technically right at the granule level… if we were to get into the nuances of UTXO sets
Agreed, I explain lightning like an escrow when talking to people and then just break down the differences