nostr:nprofile1qqsw58n0dqm5rmrnxw69g0ltdyzsv68k6elstufe9r3zdd7nf8lqqpgpzpmhxue69uhh5cts9emkzarrdqhs9jlyjq you probably didn't even read the first article's paragraph... 😅
Discussion
I did: This reaction was about the notion that LN is 'fake Bitcoin', because it's literally a real Bitcoin transaction.
The other message was a direct answer to your article, and my disagreement was on the notion that there is a risk it becomes a CBDC 2.0
The fact that you can choose your own level of sovereignty makes it impossible to make it into a CBDC.
How could you be sovereign using LN if this network is largely dependent of custodial nodes? It isn't simply "If you want more privacy then you just need to configure your own node and... VOILÀ!" Even your non-custodial node on LN need to pass through centralized hubs. It's not so hard to understand with this picture 👇
Ok, so this centralised node gets to route my transaction. Because of onion routing he only get the information important for routing, so he only knows which node it comes from, how many sats and which node he passes it on to. He doesn't know who the initial sender and receiver is. What is he going to do to me?
Exactly, all he CAN do is choosing to route or to sensor. Guess what, If he start censoring he becomes a very unreliable node to route through, so he will lose its dominant position.
Your argument is comparable to people who think we would see all these evil monopolies in a stateless society. This is simply not how it works. Without state coercion monopolies can be exelent and remain, or abuse their position and be disrupted.