Yeah, lightning on nostr is such a good example.

Over time companies could build trust through track record/reputation, kind of like how people trust visa, amex and mastercard. Cashapp uses lightning, and as it gets built out more, it could facilitate higher amounts.

More layer twos will be built of course, maybe some will outdo lightning.

To state the obvious, like Nik Bhatia in layer money talks about money is built on layers. Gold takes too much energy, it's too costly - not possible to move fast hence paper money and wire transfers.

Critical aspects of the base layer being robust security, transparency, immutability, decentralization and proof of work; it's a feature to have privacy and near instant transactions on secondary layers.

And the obvious again for anyone interested, once you open a payment channel and commit funds, it can stay open indefinitely as long as both parties keep it active, no need to settle on the Bitcoin blockchain.

This lets you transact privately off-chain, potentially forever, creating a kind of self-contained, circular economy within the channel.

The base layer only gets involved if you close the channel or someone tries to cheat, triggering the on-chain settlement.

It’s a powerful setup for privacy and efficiency, as long as the channel stays funded and both sides cooperate.

Lightning channels do involve a degree of trust, but it’s minimal and technical rather than interpersonal.

Both parties need to trust that the other won’t try to cheat by broadcasting an old channel state, but this is deterred by the protocol’s penalty mechanisms-like the watchtower feature or timelocks that let honest parties reclaim funds if someone tries to close the channel maliciously.

But yeah, if someone unilaterally closes the channel, it settles on-chain, and that privacy layer shifts.

Trust in Lightning Network channels often ties to reputation and incentives, especially in practical scenarios.

If you're running a channel with a big player like a mastercard or visa equivalent (some entity with a strong track record) they're heavily incentivized to keep the channel open and act ethically to protect their brand and business.

Same goes for smaller, private setups; reputation and the promise of ongoing business creates a strong motive to avoid screwing over a partner by closing a channel maliciously.

Plus, legal recourse, adding another layer of deterrence. Even in off-grid or remote cases, mutual benefit and social trust can keep things stable. It's less about blind trust and more about reputation and track record and or aligned incentives backed by the protocol's safeguards.

Agree, lightning network is awesome

These issues aren't flaws in Bitcoin's protocol-they're external constraints, like you said in your original post.

Fungibility at the protocol level still holds; one Satoshi is technically equal to another.

The taint or blacklisting is a human layer-governments, exchanges, or analytics firms imposing their rules.

Tools like CoinJoin and Lightning, while not perfect, are part of perpetual advancements on top of bitcoin. Incentives drive governments to try to capture and control, and people are incentivized to innovation to be free.

Bitcoin is revolutionary it is money no one can make more of, and tools can be built on top of it for privacy while bitcoin actively defunds the governments ability to rule arbitrarily by way of a hidden tax through endless debt and money creation, ending their ability to enforce tracking methods or unethical practices against bitcoin.

The tools you mentioned, coinjoin and lightning are still relatively new and there is much to come.

They do give users ways to opt out of that surveillance, and as adoption grows, these tools will become more seamless and advance greatly.

Plus, Bitcoin's decentralized nature means no single entity can enforce these restrictions universally-unlike fiat, where central banks can dictate terms.

That said, concerns about credit scores for addresses are real, repression is real. Chain analysis companies like Chainalysis are building profiles on wallet activity, and some services already use this to flag or block transactions. It's a privacy hit, no doubt.

But nothing in human history has been better at protecting against and defunding fiat money and the rule of law that comes with it.

Bitcoin's open source community is relentless, new privacy solutions keep popping up to counter this, like improved mixing protocols or layer two scaling that obscures transaction details.

Government actions like tracking coins or imposing regulations actually spotlight Bitcoin's value.

When people see moves against private property or sound money, it wakes them up, pushes them to advocate for Bitcoin, even if they're not deep in it themselves.

That growing awareness is huge; it fuels political and social momentum, awareness and education.

And yeah, Bitcoin's hard cap and decentralized setup kneecap governments' ability to print endless fiat to fund wars or prop up markets through subsidies.

It's defunding the very systems trying to enforce things like address blacklisting or coin taint.

These tracking methods are historically common tools of oppression, not new, just repackaged for the digital age.

Bitcoin's base layer fungibility, with one Satoshi always equaling another, stays untouched by that.

Its borderless, immutable, nation-state-resistant nature makes it a unique weapon to dodge centralized overreach.

Concerns about tainted coins and credit scores aren't trivial, but they're not fatal or cause for concern, they are to be expected and they are why bitcoin exists. It wont change in a day and provably, nothing has been as capable as bitcoin

Bitcoin's design lets it evolve through tools like CoinJoin or new privacy tech to keep pushing back.

Bitcoin is not just money but a revolution dismantling centralized control worldwide, ushering in individual human rights and a better, more peaceful world for every person on Earth.