I’ll go out on a limb and say, day 1, this will be the case. Remove any ambiguity. Any wallet that accepts USDT on lightning will be censorable, and there will not be a single wallet which can accept USDT without the company being able to invalidate the tokens.
I understand and appreciate you being dedicated to your company. But I think you spoke with such conviction, stating it was I who was wrong, to now go back and say “I’m here to learn” is a cop-out.
Day 1 of what? USDT being issued on lightning or a new wallet adopting it?
What does it mean to be censorable versus an actual enforcement action mandating censorship?
USDT on lightning is live today on speed wallet, but it's a custodial wallet. You could say it's censorable because of its custody design, but not due to the protocol.
You're putting money on cynicism without bothering to define extremely vague terms. The burden then falls on me because I understand the tech. I don't see a way to objectively validate a censorship event, which won't be public, (I'll be under NDA,) or will be a public accusation but it's impossible to validate that a lightning transaction occurred or didn't occur.
This is a stupid bet and I'm not interested. I don't mean to bring these things up to get you to define them. I'm not interested.
It’s simple: if you cannot transfer it for something you value, and it still have value to the individual you transferred it to, it is censorable.
Good luck with your company and NDA. Tether will never be uncensorable (as defined above).
