Yeah we covered those points pretty well I'd say. I just with STN was more open minded to give Monero the intellectual thought it deserves. If he applied just a portion of his LN efforts I think he'd see our point at of view.
this is nostr:npub1yxp7j36cfqws7yj0hkfu2mx25308u4zua6ud22zglxp98ayhh96s8c399s suggesting that #monero has a UX problem because a TARGETED attack by a SOPHISTICATED attacker sending a custom transaction *could link together ownership of two different subaddresses (if the monero user had shared both of them with the adversary of course)
meanwhile
in the VAST majority of the ways LN is actually used,
ALL your sends and receives are trivially known by someone to belong to a single entity.
because you're using a custodian. or you only have one or two fat channels with a LSP.
what to do to get transaction unlinkability??
no problem!
Just run a full-stack #Bitcoin lightning routing node! Open lots of channels and tie up your liquidity while fees are low!
You can establish plausible deniability for your LN txs and not have to worry if the FBI is sending custom txs to link your monero subaddresses together. easypeasy!
anyone who has run a LN node can confirm you can just "set-it and forget it."
Just like making a monero node available over tor!
ok. I'm done.
Discussion
No replies yet.