Nostr Web Client

If hodl invoices achieve wide adoption it will have an outsized impact on the network. A lot of things will change but let's keep it simple: it will push the entire network toward a reputation based system. This is bad for a permissionless network. Ideally, I should be able to spin up a new node, commit capital, and send payments with a high success rate. But now everyone is suspicious of unknown nodes. They're tracking your invoices to see how long they stay open. People run block lists and maintain a database of surveillance data. We already see this happening with channel probing. Maybe it is inevitable, idk. But I certainly don't agree that we should run toward this outcome. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In my previous reply I was facetiously describing ecash, which IMO is a categorical improvement for the async payments model. The sender does not need to be online for the recipient to receive payment. This is the role of the central server or "mint". It's just wheeling and dealing lightning payment promises all day, blind to the identity of its users. With the advent of DLEQ proofs, you can even trustlessly transfer ecash offline as long as the recipient knows the public key of the mint. People complain that the mint can rug you but is this really different than when a hodl invoice expires and you get a channel force close? I contend that it is not. This design adds a central party to facility async payments, improves privacy, and doesn't push negative externalities onto the network at large. The only downside is that you can't yet hack something together in a weekend. Or maybe you can...the gap is closing fast!

Super Testnet 2y ago

Let me try to answer your main concern by way of an analogy.

Suppose a little old woman opened up a street business where she will give you a quick massage. For $5, you can sit in her chair for up to five minutes and she will massage you and talk soothingly to you in a grandmotherly way. Her business is quite successful, and people love to sit in her chair, but she notices something: people rarely stay for the full 5 minutes. They typically only stay for 1 minute. Considering this, she drops her price, but keeps the sign the same otherwise: for $1, you may sit in her chair for up to 5 minutes and be pampered.

In this situation, I think it would be silly if she got mad at someone who occupied the whole 5 minutes, or close to it. The little old woman is under no obligation to offer the cheaper rate or expect every sitter to only sit for 1 minute. As long as her sign says you may sit 5 minutes for $1, any sitter should feel perfectly at ease sitting 5 minutes for $1. If the little old woman doesn't like it, she can raise her fee or lower the time limit. The silliest thing she can do is scream at customers to stop staying for 5 minutes when her own sign says they may, or tell them they are ruining her business, or making her mad. The sitters are only accepting the terms she advertises, over which she has complete control.

To me, it's the exact same with hodl invoices and lightning. If, for some reason, a node operator doesn't like the rates my users pay to use an htlc slot for something slightly closer to its maximum length than is typical, they have two options: reduce the time limit, or raise the rates. If they don't do that they have no one to blame but themselves. All my users are doing is paying the advertised rate for the advertised time limit. I don't think it's wise to blame them or me. If you're a node operator, and you don't like what my users are paying, change your sign. Be the change you want to see in the world -- don't harp on my users to stop using your node in the way you are publicly advertising they may use it.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

vnprc 2y ago

Except you're not just sitting on this little old woman's chair. You are also sitting in half a dozen other people's chairs taking up space. The 5 minute limit has to be negotiated by all chair owners. Also, if you sit in the chair too long a portal to the underworld opens up and swallows the chair and also some cash from the little old lady's purse and one or more of the other unlucky chair owners. It's not a cut and dry analogy any more.

Super Testnet 2y ago

> You are also sitting in half a dozen other people's chairs taking up space

I'm paying the rates they advertise and staying within the time limits they advertise. If they don't like it, they can change their limits or raise their rates

> The 5 minute limit has to be negotiated by all chair owners

It is. If my payment didn't abide by their advertised limits I couldn't use them in my route.

> Also, if you sit in the chair too long a portal to the underworld opens up

I think you mean mean if I stay in the chair for their advertised limit, a portal to the underworld opens up. And if that's the case they should obviously lower their limit. Don't tell me I can stay for five minutes if that destroys your business