I did. Okay so sender privacy is better that's fair.
Still think it's off the mark to brag about things being permissionless and working flawlessly with a larger than average payment when the receiver is on a custodial solution with a bitcoin bank. I have strong doubts that would have worked if he was using his own node.
That is the "problem" with bitcoin and even nostr. It is complicated and not worth the hassle for the normal person. With Stike (while not as pure as the virgin mary) made it "easy" (reduced the friction) enough to use bitcoin & lightning and receive a payment in an instant.
Just download the app and I'll send it to you versus self-hosting your own node.
Most people do not and will NEVER want that (even though it is the best way to maximize the technology)
Both ways are needed to maximize adoption.
Why is "maximizing adoption" the goal? Good ux without sacrificing privacy and sovereignty should be the goal. If 80% of normies are never gonna use it correctly anyway, why are we chasing them down and making sacrifices to get them to use it poorly? When the goal is popularity you will get this kind of product.
There are bitcoin apps you can download and "just use" without sacrificing sovereignty if you use onchain, even without your own node (though it's better with). Fees are low. There's little need for lightning. I don't outright hate lightning, but it has yet to deliver what it was advertised as and it's almost 10 years old.
Also Mary had other kids, she didn't stay a virgin.
Look into Monero. You are ready for it!
I'm not against it, I just haven't taken the time.
Why? The more people adopt it, the more opportunities are available that it can be used daily.
With bitcoin both ways can be used together. Just because someone else uses a custodian, doesn't mean you have to, but if no such custodian exists, they won't bother with bitcoin at all and then the opportunity to exchange bitcoin instead of fiat is gone.
The "purist" mentality that ALL must use bitcoin in the most self-sovereign form is what will hold it back. I think that is the way it should be used, but I realize only a tiny minority of people will ever do it. It is like the Richard Stallman stance, not that he is wrong about free software... but the majority will never adopt his purism stance.
But I guess we can all just HODL our bitcoin and zap each other.
Conversely if people keep using these things in permissioned, custodial, registered ways and then get rugged or reported they're worse than if they'd used cash.
Instead of fixing issues at the protocol or even app layer, "solution as a service" gets promoted and then people give up trying to fix the original issue. Influencers and service providers use the social layer to promote their products and say people who are critical arent trying, which is disingenuous.
I don't care about having Saylor or the general public validating my choice to acquire and use Bitcoin. I care that it works when I need it.
I'm not talking about being "validated", I'm talking about increasing the number of opportunities to use bitcoin
That sounds good but what do you actually mean by it? Im not just being contrarian. In an ideal scenario for you, are you paid in bitcoin and paying for everything in bitcoin? Or are you using Bitcoin for privacy and censorship resistance specifically? The answers to those questions determine the way you approach it and therefore the outcomes that you get.
To nostr:nprofile1qqsw4v882mfjhq9u63j08kzyhqzqxqc8tgf740p4nxnk9jdv02u37ncpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgjwaehxw309ac82unsd3jhqct89ejhxlha6p9 ‘s original point, have you tried a large payment like that on your own Lightning infrastructure? “Strong doubts” sound like you have not. That dude that claimed the bounty has not worked on figuring it out and trying it. He’s just fortunate that Strike exists and made it easy. FYI I routinely send and receive payments larger than that over lightning in a non-custodial way. It works well and gives me quite a few unique benefits. Not saying that as a flex, but trying to offer a data point rather than an assumption. 😃
Yes and there are several merchants in the comments here (even more important for them) who run into payments failing to go through. When you're a merchant, a failed payment will lose you customers. I'm not just blowing smoke. I wish it worked better. If you want proof that I made the effort and have been there since ye olden days: 
Man I don’t know what to say. It feels like we are living in different worlds.
