Oh did I miss the time where email servers were produced by several companies at its advent? Or are you using an apples and oranges comparison?
Discussion
You and I both know that the vast majority of people are not running their own bitcoin lightning node.
Even here on Nostr.
BTCPay tech support chats are dead empty most of the time. You're saying these people all immediately figured it out? And rarely have issues? It's dead because only professional companies are using it. Not the average person.
BTCpay is not the easiest, best, or most used Lightning Node, or software. The reason most don't run a node is because they've been told it's too hard. I had never really used Linux before 3 years ago. THAT is harder than setting up or maintaining a node. A miniPC, Start9 node, Mynode, Umbrella software, and so many others make setup step by step simple. Most people can keep a computer on. Most people can copy/paste. Most people in Bitcoin know how to fund a node. Setting up Lightning channels are a matter of going to Amboss or 1ML and finding a good channel partner or make one with a friend.
The people who want perfect money to have an instant transactional layer but don't want to do those simple things don't deserve it. They deserve to get rugged by their custodian until they learn it's not hard at all.
nostr:npub1rxysxnjkhrmqd3ey73dp9n5y5yvyzcs64acc9g0k2epcpwwyya4spvhnp8 has a billion videos of step by step solutions to this very problem. Even organized into playlists for your convenience. No excuses are compelling, Run your own node.
Start9 and many of the other things you're talking about are large financial upfront commitment, to even receive it. Most people aren't going to do this, and that's why the deep state wants to push the Bitcoin small block maxi routine, to have people like you act as cheerleader to oppress actual real world use.
Dude, I put StartOS on a Raspi4, ano old windowsXP tower I had in the closet and THEN I bought a server from them... What cost? The first two were less than $20 and the server I bought with Bitcoin that had appreciated.
What does the Deep state have to do with free open source software? You sound like someone who does security theater to make things sound more nefarious than they actually are. If people don't have $20 to spend on running their own sovereign money and a way to have financial freedom, I guess you got me.
The primary purpose of Nostr and Bitcoin is to own with self-custody your money and identity. It is not logic to promote Microsoft Windows which can access those private keys with closed source tech. For example, the new versions of Windows are rolling out Recall, with AI surveillance.
Now you are arguing you have an old version of windows before the telemetry kicked into high gear. That leads to my next point, which is that the small-block propaganda, fails to take into account that storage costs fall over time. So the small-block propaganda traps people into old tech.
Further, you've failed to address the actual bitcoin required to run a node, which is more than $20. And you've failed to address that lightning benefits from centralization. Many small channels make it harder to route.
Finally, your reference to me "selling" something is pathetic. As I am for free donating my time to engage with your propaganda. I make nothing off promoting Monero. In sharp contrast, blockstream, start9, and many of these bitcoin companies profit from Bitcoin Layer 1 failing. So the very thing you're promoting is a leech ecosystem.
Guy, I wiped the tower... And installed a Linux distro then used docker containers for my BTC stack. I feel like you just read what you want to read and disregard my point.
Monero is a shitcoin and until now I didn't know or care that you were shilling for it. I was just correcting your misapprehensions about Bitcoin.
You don't understand economics. I don't code (but I can read it). Layer 1 Bitcoin is the asset layer. As such does not and should not have total anonymity for audit reasons. The currency/coupon layer is for anonymous transactions at high speed.
Lightning doesn't need any centralized nodes. People are just lazy and don't want to make a federated concentric model.
And what are you even talking about "cost required to run a node?" This is as asinine as saying "What about all the calories you burn just to acquire food!? Why don't you talk about that?"
It's called opportunity cost. You don't get any of the benefits if you don't play the game.
Anyway, I don't know why this has turned into shit on bitcoin from a position of ignorance discussion but, I don't care about you and I guess you can have for staying poor.
Have Fun Staying Surveilled 
👍 k
Looks like you didn't actually pay attention to what you were replying to or formulate a reply, but still wasted time with a reply notification. Are you trying to argue in bad faith?
Looks like you didn't read the reply's response to what I wrote originally and assumed it was a coherent rebuttal to my points. Do you want to mind your own business?
I'm not reading this but as you can see I'm replying anyway. Let me know how much dopamine you get out of this notification
I am more than willing to make a statement on why I think Monero is better than Bitcoin, & or lightning if that’s what you want but you gave no refutable points.
You just said it was a shitcoin without stating reasons why you think it is.
Please give me your fair, & objective refutation, & I will try my best to give my reasoning unless you want me to say my thoughts first.
Well, I would direct you to this about the privacy claims of Monero: https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04299
Secondly, the fact that it has an unlimited supply makes it by definition abundant and not scarce. Scarcity is one of five primary attributes of money.
So, if XMR can't be private and it can't be money, I don't think it would be a very good private money. But like I said before, I don't care to talk about Monero any more than I care to talk about the Nira from Nigeria.
My entire gripe was the fact that people want a monetary asset to be private, it can be psuedononymous but never private because of how money functionally works. The currency layer(layer 2) is the layer with which velocity, transferability, and anonymity should exist. The same way cash does for the dollar (prior to 1971). I study economics, and I know more than average about coding. This crowd seems to skew too heavily toward the coding cleverness than the economic ramifications of what a digital money MUST have to be a viable option for the future.
You're linking an out of date paper from 2017 lol
Everything mentioned in it has long been resolved
Monero is scarce it just doesn't have a fixed supply. Economic scarcity implies only that it is not available in limitless supply and is in demand.
Okay, leave the economic definitions to me. Scarcity is based on supply not demand. Just because I have only made one painting due to the demand of one customer doesn't mean the painting is scarce as I can create as many as I'd like with the rising demand. Monero is not scarce.
Secondly, you said you would give your reasoning with your refutation. Out of date isn't a reason. Which fork of Monero has fixed all of these issues? Specifically the 0-mixin Txns that are identifiable.
Monero is scarce. It's limited in supply at any moment AND under demand.
I think you're confusing me with someone else. That was my first comment in this thread I have no clue what you're talking about claiming I was going to give a "refutation"
If you're the economics guy please leave the Monero talk to me because you clearly have zero clue. A standard ring size is now enforced by the protocol and has been for a very long time. There are no 0-mixin transactions. And all this long defunct criticism only ever applied to sender privacy.
yeah my bad, since I was asking someone specific questions I assumed they were responding not someone not even in the conversion.
the point made earlier was that 0-mixin coins still exist and therefore reduce the privacy of future transactions with those coins. either way, I don't care about that shitcoin and I am tired of talking about it. have a good one.
Dude everyone responds to everyone unsolicited. It's Nostr. You did so yourself under Simplified Privacys thread. But whatever its fine.
All those old 0-mixin coins have to do (which had to be done manually and intentionally by those users in the first place) is make a single transaction and their sender privacy is no longer exposed.
Hi, that’s probably me y’all are talking about I was at my fiat job.
I’ll reply when I get home 👍.
If you read the pdf (I skimmed it), it mentions RingCT which is the current protocol it drastically improved privacy over the prior protocol, and the newer protocol coming within the next few years Full Chain Memberships will further improve upon Monero's privacy.
It appears the original website discussed older Monero standards but the pdf appears to mention changes after 2017.
It does not have "unlimited" supply, the supply growth is fixed, Monero's supply grows by 0.6 xmr every 2 minutes through tail emissions.
Monero's scarcity mechanism like Bitcoins is lost seeds, people dying with coins, faulty hardware, etc. but unlike Bitcoin it issues new coins into circulation to offset those lost coins.
People who use monero view Monero as the digital equivalent of physical cash.
Monero isn't an "asset" it's a currency, and like any currency you need a constant, and stable supply of it in circulation to be used, that's why people spend monero because they know they can get more later on.
That being said Monero is more scarce than Bitcoin for The next ~16 years.
Okay, so currency has to be based on an asset to maintain a valuation beyond speculative usage. Monero has no underlying asset on which it bases its value. Also currency doesn't need a constant stable supply. That's just how the dollar maintains its place. Currency is only needed insofar as it eleveates a financial commerce bottleneck. With Gold being so heavy, paper currency was used as a trade medium to increase trade velocity. With Bitcoin, lightning increases trade velocity through by passing the approximate 10min block time. It also is onion routed increasing anonymity and obfuscating the number and amounts of transactions. Monero is in a technical sense unlimited in supply but in a real sense more so not limited by a supply cap. The constant changing of protocol also lends to not ever having very wide adoption because you can never build anything on top of the shifting sands of the protocol.
Currencies are a medium of exchange.
Neither does Bitcoin, or The U.S. Dollar.
Having a constant stable supply of currency helps it maintain liquidity, and velocity, currencies that appreciate in value don't circulate as easily.
Monero has a block time of two minutes with funds being unlocked after 10 confirmations (20 Minutes) whereas Bitcoin (On-Chain) can take hours to days, if the network doesn't reject it, Bitcoin lightning has a lot of issues, Custodial wallets to function, needing wallet to be open to recieve funds, Bitcoin locked up in channels, poor channel management can cause funds to be lost, etc.
Monero has no supply cap but that does not mean it's "unlimited", it follows the issuance principle of tails emissions which is a constant, and predictable supply increase.
Momero protocols changes on an as needed basis, Bitcoin Soft Forks, & Hard Forks also, the main difference is Monero is more open to forking to tackle issues with monero, and innovate.
Monero is used just as much if not more in most peer 2 peer marketplaces where multiple cryptocurrencies are accepted, Bitcoin has the better legal infrastructure but Monero has actual underground market growth.
I am not going to go back and forth about economic inaccuracies. "Constant stable supply" is not a thing in the world of currency that is infinitely divisible. There is no problem with liquidity in bitcoin. Custodial wallets aren't needed in lightning. Receiving funds in an invoice payment system necessitates the wallet to be open. Or just use a web socketed Bolt12 address or a lightning address and your wallet software is always on. You don't "lose funds" due to poor channel management either. They just return to your on chain address if your channel closes. Again, I don't care about monero and it was outside of the scope of my criticism of the original post. A protocol that never ossifies is not useful. And without a supply cap it is not useful as currency without a peg to a money.
Lightning users who have lost funds watching their on chain wallets for those refunds after reading your propaganda 
cool, link me one instance and I'll conceded. But technically there's no way a lightning contract "loses" funds. You simply force close the channel, the funds return to your on chain address. What I find is people like you don't use things correctly, don't have access to your on chain addresses, you don't have a self hosted node active, or have watchtowers for any counterparty risk. You say things like:
I lost my Bitcoin when I used lightning!
"what happened?"
well Ididn'tb write my on chain private key down, I deleted my wallet then my channel partner force closed while I was trying to move funds!
-So in short YOU did that yourself. You threw away the combination to your vault and expected to be able to access it.
Points 1&2- yeah custodians can rug you, this can happen with literally anything(yes with XMR)
Points 3&5- if you cheat, your channel peer gets compensation. If they cheat and you don't catch them for 2 WEEKS using a lightning wallet, watchtower, lightning node software, yes you got your money stolen. That seems reasonable because if you do catch them they risk node access, all of their channel funds, and reputation.
Point 4- yeah, don't let people use your computer and route over tor.
Yes, I conceded that if you try to steal your peer's funds, you DO lose your funds. My bad, I should have stated that caveat.
lol, and again, read the thread. some force closed channels were returned to their on chain address. the other 4 channels in question were still open and active channels that were later collaboratively closed. and a nice telegram scammer to throw into the mix. no funds were lost.
did you read the thread or just the headline? no funds were lost. they returned to the on chain address when the channel force-closed. (By the way Alby was a custodial node service so, not a great example of a sovereign use of lightning.)
Ok, I didn't read the whole thing on the alby one but waiting 14 days for your funds to return to you is a bit ridiculous isn't it?
I mean conventional banking only takes 3 to 5 days, so in the mean time onchain liquidity is frozen up waiting for lightning to resolve itself.
Personally, I enjoy on-chain.
Force-closes are extreme circumstances. and the HTLC has a lock to avoid scams. giving someone 2 weeks to see they were being cheated is a feature not a bug. in most cases the collaborative close is used and you get on chain funds as soon as the txn is confirmed. it would be much quicker if threat actors weren't a concern in the real world. having the entire financial record on chain at the rate cash or credit is used would need storage the size of a Colosseum to verify. keeping rapid transactions off chain for velocity and on chain for settlement is the best way to keep a system decentralized.
You are either being dishonest or myopic. There are two things that Bitcoin has over Monero: lightning payments and hash power to defend against 51% attacks. The tail emission is not really an issue as the amount of inflation gets smaller and smaller with each block mined.
Monero is much better on privacy, which is necessary to be fungible, which Bitcoin is not.
Bitcoin WILL be used for surveillance and control of the populace.
UTXOs WILL be sanctioned.
Monero fixes those issues.
And yes, I've read the books.
Just stating something as a fact doesn't make it so.
"UTXOs will be sanctioned" -How? explain the mechanism than allows any nation or actor to literally disallow the use of a UTXO.
Monero has VERY little monetary premium, which is the point of a money. If I secretly trade literal pieces of shit, YOU'RE RIGHT! it's untraceable! but no one will use that as a financial instrument.
All assets need a final settlement layer that is auditable to a layman. the olds of the future will be no more inclined to use monero than the olds of today are. we have a hard enough time convincing boomers of Bitcoin's efficacy. The reason you think that XMR is secure is that there is not as much scrutiny upon it. Dudes with bad OpSec are still getting ganked by the feds. So, what makes you think the average user on XMR in your fantasized future would ever use it correctly.
either way Monero is irrelevant.
The point being Bitcoin has the monetary power, momentum, and adoption to be THE global asset layer. the subsequent layers are where you focus your security and anonymity hurdles. onion or garlic routing on lightning, making a fungible second layer protocol, but they all use Bitcoin at base because it IS the money. I tackle this from an economics perspective. Market actors don't what to hide their activity when it comes to assets. It's the quicker faster deals that need the privacy protects you guys obsess over...on a public forum, btw.
"How? explain the mechanism than allows any nation or actor to literally disallow the use of a UTXO."
Arrest anyone who accepts it without turning it over to the government. Pretty simple.
"Monero has VERY little monetary premium, which is the point of a money. If I secretly trade literal pieces of shit, YOU'RE RIGHT! it's untraceable! but no one will use that as a financial instrument."
This comes off as completely delusional in the face of darknet markets completely switching over to XMR and anecdotal stories of companies like Guns N Bitcoin who said when they started accepting monero, people were spending more monero than bitcoin and credit cards combined.
"All assets need a final settlement layer that is auditable to a layman."
First of all, why?
Second, do you think a layman can audit the bitcoin blockchain?
"the olds of the future will be no more inclined to use monero than the olds of today are."
You mean old people? Why do you think they would be more likely to use bitcoin? Because they can put it on their retirement balance sheet? Are they really "using" bitcoin?
"The reason you think that XMR is secure is that there is not as much scrutiny upon it."
There have been some pretty sizable bounties to be able to trace a monero payment.
"Dudes with bad OpSec are still getting ganked by the feds. So, what makes you think the average user on XMR in your fantasized future would ever use it correctly."
This is just cope. Not worthy of a reply.
"The point being Bitcoin has the monetary power, momentum, and adoption to be THE global asset layer."
I get the sense that your real driving motivation is NGU, not that you'd ever admit it.
"the subsequent layers are where you focus your security and anonymity hurdles. onion or garlic routing on lightning, making a fungible second layer protocol, but they all use Bitcoin at base because it IS the money."
I never said bitcoin isn't monero. I don't have a fanatical hatred of bitcoin the way you do of monero. In fact, I don't hate it at all. I just think there are a lot of people with blinders on. The future of LN is custodial. There's no way around that. The math makes it impossible to work otherwise.
"I tackle this from an economics perspective. Market actors don't what to hide their activity when it comes to assets."
That's retarded.
"It's the quicker faster deals that need the privacy protects you guys obsess over...on a public forum, btw."
I said lightning is better for fast payments. You can't use monero in any sizable, in person, business, for the same reason you can't use on-chain bitcoin. Too slow.
I maintain my position. You are either being dishonest or myopic.
Man, I should really just quote everything you said piecemeal, and write the riveting rebuttal:
"That's cope." Or "That's retarded."
It really saves time in the thinking department, thanks.
So you don't have any reply to my actual arguments, faggot? Typical retard cope. Have fun being assblasted and simping for the state you fucking stooge.
Lol, I was mocking you, genius.I simply said what you said to me. Boy, you seem angry. Been losing your wealth by saving in Monero?
If I saw this chart, I'd be angry too.
No. I'm annoyed because I took the time to reply and address your points, then you acted like a faggot.
I thought you would maybe be willing to have a good faith discussion. You tricked me. Congratulations, faggot.
No, YOU did that. I wrote several points which were responded to with "cope" or "retarded" by YOU.
I'm sorry you are so angry that people can use the same words you use but alas English is an open source protocol and anyone can use it. If you'd like a thoughtful response, you might want to treat your counterpart with the same respect.
God you are such a passive aggressive little faggot. You're just latching onto those two words because you have no rebuttal for the actual points I brought up and you think you can turn your nose up and play the high ground.
That's weak pussy shit. You have nothing.
Brain dead fucking retard.
Thanks for confirming that you're just a NGU shill, though.