Unpopular opinion but.... I've lost more sats by running my own lightning node vs sats on a custodial wallet. I've also spent more sats on a non custodial wallet (channel fees) than ove lost on a non custodial. That's not to say a custodial wallet is safe but at least it takes away the element of your own stupidity.
That said, I'm still gonna push for self custody because it's important. Sometimes you must sacrifice smaller losses to prevent a larger catastrophic loss.
Learning process
Yes exactly.
Name of the game is to cross the finish line (hyperbitcoinization) by having lost the least amount of sats. Deflationary assets have a tendency to be lost π€·π»ββοΈ
Some of the losses on my own node were out of my control. But if I were to lose any sats on exchange or on a custodial wallet, ALL of those losses would have been out of my control.
Control whatbyou can and accept the risks. It's always a tradeoff.
Same here, I am about 1.5M or more in red with my own node, and all the fees to open/close channels πΆπΎπ€£π«
Well, using phoenix it is the same, just you pay more fees than a private ln node .. Channel are convenient if opened when fee are lows and if you invest on sizing them for your spending use , you don't need to going back on chain ...
Non custodial wallets are def more expensive. Still doing self custody for safety reasons but custodial wallets are so much easier
Blessed are the lightning node runners, for they shall inherit⦠the on-chain fees of forces-closed channels.
β‘οΈπβ‘οΈ
μ²μ λ릴λλ μ΄μ©μμμ. μ¨μ²΄μΈ μμλ£ λ΄λ©΄μ μ ν컀μ€ν°λ μ°μ΅νλκ±°μ²λΌ, λΌμ΄νΈλ μ±λ μ΄κ³ λ«κ³ μ΄μν΄λ³΄λ©΄μ μΌμ λμ μ¬ν μ μλΉνκ²λ¨. 곡λΆμ λλ λΉμ©μ λπ
How did you lost them? .. I mean, a private LN node is a on chain wallet that collect back sats when channel get closed ...
Channels get forced closed and have fees associated. You then have to pay another fee to get those channels open again. When your channel partner goes offline and gets force closed, it's entirely out of your control. Similarly, my node has gone offline randomly before and I've had channels force closed because of it. Lost a lot of sats in the high fee environment we've been in.
Unfortunately I'm not sure because I never saw that... But normal closing channel it is at cost of who is asking for it .. About forcing close I'm not sure if it is the same. If your node was a routing one and was causing htlc locking that means that was locking out other nodes sats , well it could be .. If your node it is routing htlc, it should work fine , if not it could cause locking funds from other nodes ..
Yeah my node is a routing node. When htlcs get stuck anywhere in the chain of routes, it can cause a cascade of force closes. This is entirely out of my node's control.
