Replying to Avatar Uxellodunum

I've been looking into this and while I'll always seek to self-custody, what instantly struck me as a couple of amazing features were:

- The improvements in custody vs LN custody. I'd rather the coins be lost than stolen, this is a key difference! I'm growingly of the mind that custody has a place, but LN custody always seemed botched. eCash does it properly, your tokens are assigned to you and only you.

- Offline payments.

I'm sure there are more, but still looking into it.

I do wonder though, this effectively makes Cashu a layer 3 protocol - But having LN as a pre-requisite hop will hurt adoption. Can't wait to see direct on-chain to ecash ramps.
Avatar
HoloKat 1y ago

Technically the user never needs to comprehend L3 or L2. "Get your money" "cash out your money"

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Uxellodunum 1y ago

Absolutely, just like the TCP/IP stack, I understand we want to blur the concept of layers as we smoothen out the UX.

My thinking is more in-line with having one layer as a pre-req to another.

Ideally, users will be able to on-ramp directly to ecash for day-to-day spending, Lightning (as in L2) only if they're adamant on self-custody and the timechain for their larger stash and to avoid liquidity issues, but I think Lightning should be an if, not a must. That, or pretty much all Lightning custodians implement the likes of cashu instead.

Otherwise we end up with:

- What's the point of current Lightning custodians if cashu just does it better?

- Is their only advantage at that point the fact that there's less onboarding friction? (one less "layer" to go through)