If poor people were the only people that don't like being scammed, and the future was the present, and a complete removal of poor people from the internet was guaranteed, then yeah, maybe you could force universal acceptance of "Bitcoin" and "lightning" as synonyms
But why are you talking to me about it if the goal is to remove me from the internet for seeming too poor?
lol
doesn't take a very great amount of bandwidth to use nostr. probably not a lot more is required to run a lightning node but reliability will cause problems because most LN nodes will force close on a channel that is offline too often. bandwidth cost, is very low, probably no more than 128kbit is enough.
i'm not forcing anyone to accept anything, and you can't use bitcoin, or monaro, without an internet connection, but you also don't need much bandwidth, like i say, 128kbit is probably more than enough. i was using dialup 56kbit back in like, 1995, it's fucking retarded to say that you can't be part of the internet, and forcing you off it is not about the technology it's about manipulating massive numbers of people to allow this kind of bullcrap.
I do not need an Internet connection to hold Bitcoin or doggie coin or Monero, they are self custodial.
I still don't quite get what you're arguing for here
*hold or receive
so they're also self-receivable? Never seen that said
holding is not much good if you can't sell it to buy stuff.
But I'm not asking for self-spending
Custody involving less than 2 people makes sense as a goal, a transaction involving less than 3 people could make sense as a goal when using precious metals, but a transaction involving less than 2 people would never seem to make sense and it seems reasonable to expect many people involved in each cryptocurrency transaction (unlike precious metals for example)
To be clear - I mention a "third person" partly because you can transact silver one-on-one, face-to-face without an arbitrary fee but it doesn't teleport across the planet in 10 minutes like Bitcoin
