It's not a question of being smarter or more knowledgeable, but rather that those of us who don't understand the more technical aspects shouldn't assume that others are wrong.
If Cody says he's studied it thoroughly and has doubts about Spark, it's likely that he's right, and he's not the only one who has doubts.
Even though I use Spark every day, I always remain cautious and simply suggest trying it out, then everyone can make their own choice.
I don’t care who’s smarter, nor am I certain that my understanding is correct. Spark’s documentation doesn’t reveal much about the technical details, so I can only arrive at a conclusion that makes sense to me based on the information I’ve read. Perhaps I’m wrong, and I welcome anyone to point out my mistakes.
However, if the assumption is that I’m simply biased or haven’t made the effort to understand, then there’s nothing more for me to say. After all, I’m under no obligation to investigate this, and I’ve already done more than I needed to.
I read documents, I saw many interviews.
My conclusions 1- :
Or Spark is spending a lot of money to create a protocol with the same tradeoffs of a custodial solution, something that doesn't make any sense in my mind. Or they are lying, what doesn't make any sense too.
My conclusions 2. People who are capable to understand don't really want to understand how things works. The reason: I have no idea.
The things people in my opinion are right concerned about Spark: Privacy.
