Nostr Web Client

It makes sense to me that lightning becomes a decentralised version of ACH but for bigger payments or settling between bigger players (the future of interbank transfers).

While Cashu is used for all the day to day spending of everyday people.

Then on-chain is mostly for governments, rebels, wealthy folks, and banks.

shortwavesurfer2009 1y ago

And this is how you find the people who truly do not get the revolution and what it was intended for.

nostr:note106hxyy2ls86chnv44uvfp80d7z3mu44leffw60lxjetgmj2exdlq6z50vc

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Hanshan 1y ago

lol

the last 3 years just constantly moving the LN goalposts

AU9913 1y ago

Make an actual argument instead of ad hominem

mister_monster 1y ago

I'll bite: this stuff wasn't invented so that we could create settlement layers between big players and custodial solutions for us plebs.

People that talk like this aren't after peer to peer digital cash. They just want the big boys to have to buy their bags so they can get rich. Well you can't be rich in chains, it's a gilded cage.

Custodial banking and swift. That's what's being cheered on. Is that what you want? That's not what I want.

Papa Figos 1y ago

I love heavy bags as much as the next guy, but indeed, the whole point was peer to peer digital cash.

Custodial bitcoin IOUs is not my idea of peer to peer. That might be useful for something else, but not for this.

Well, anyway. It's easy to see what works as peer to peer digital cash: authoritarian states ban it reliably.