Yes the spark API can go down, but you still have unilateral exit onchain.
When there is a better option than Spark we'll migrate to that.
No solutions, only trade-offs.
Sure - custody models involve tradeoffs. The "selling out users" thing I'm talking about actually has nothing to do with self-custody vs "custodians" or anything like that. It's much more basic.
It's about NETWORK CONNECTIONS. When you use LightSpark's "Spark" API, you are REQUIRED to make network connections (and share your data with) one of two servers. One server, "lightpark.com", is controlled by David Marcus' company. And the other server, "flashnet.com" -- is also controlled by David Marcus' company.
Any time you use a Spark wallet -- including, unfortunately, through previously trusted brands like nostr:npub1hcwcj72tlyk7thtyc8nq763vwrq5p2avnyeyrrlwxrzuvdl7j3usj4h9rq and nostr:npub1cm3rpgj7457yjuqnvdalxaauakqu0ndkpkyp5cldkyutpz4xszpsmk96wt -- your IP address, your transaction data -- EVERYTHING -- can be surveilled by LightSpark. LightSpark knows who you are sending from, who you are receiving from, your I.P. address, everything.
This is kind of unrelated to LightSpark's claims of "self-custody" (which, BTW, are bullshit, because, of course, when their API goes down, which it does often, you are shit-out-of-luck and can't access anything.)
Discussion
No replies yet.