Many bitcoiners on Nostr hadn't even used a lightning address or LNURL prior to joining Nostr.
Discussion
They were putting lnbc and even bc1 addresses into their profile and then getting confused why zaps didn’t work.
Many still do. It’s fundamentally a lack of wallets that give you a LNURL. Custodial WoS helped onboard a lot of people initially because it was very simple.
😆
nostr:note15w2d3q7rsrngfhqahp9zemuc99t2y06jxm40s8c3z9r3x7tkshss08097n
There it is 😅😂 So much of that. Even before Nostr, those of us on Twitter that used lightning addresses had to explain them all the time to other bitcoiners because of how new it all is.
I think you have to be driven by a basic interest in tech and decentralisation to adopt nostr and to continue with it. The “it just works and I don’t care how it works” centralised mindset is still very very strong for many people around the world.
It’s closer to 100% than most plebs want to admit.
Most dont care, wont run a LN whatever node.
This is what I imagine is the approach at Primal - first touch point to LN should just work™️
Can we do better for folks further interested in decentralize the things? Soon™️
Yep
We started nostr:npub1hxfkcs9gvtm49702rmwn2aeuvhkd2w6f0svm4sl84g8glhzx5u9srk5p6t for those who want to take the next step. There’s never going to be an overwhelmingly large number of people who want to do this.
Yep. I think they generally get decentralisation. They get the basics of free speech. But they don’t want to have to spend time setting up an app for zaps that in their view should just work. The great thing is many clients (social) do the notes side well once they get their head around key pairs. It’s when zapping gets involved. They have to unlearn what they have learned and then relearn something that is quite often full of acronyms and terminology that is largely alien to them.
#cashu solves this for small amounts. #mimibits is setting a good example. Custodial services require KYC. I would not onboard a new user that requires KYC. I find that ingenuine.
Custodial doesn't equal kyc though. That is incorrect.
Custodial services require KYC. I would not onboard a new user that requires KYC.
I didn't say equal.
Custodial services do not all require kyc though. That is an incorrect statement.
I think they will eventually, at least in heavily regulated jurisdictions. i.e. Wallet of Satoshi. I suspect rather than comply, they just left. I'm not sure how Alby gets away with it, maybe their dot isn't big enough on the radar screen yet?
Unlike nostr:npub1hcwcj72tlyk7thtyc8nq763vwrq5p2avnyeyrrlwxrzuvdl7j3usj4h9rq, nostr:npub1getal6ykt05fsz5nqu4uld09nfj3y3qxmv8crys4aeut53unfvlqr80nfm is hard at work building self-custodial technology to stay ahead of the game.
I won't be surprised when it happens, but it hasn't yet and saying that custodial lightning services are kyc is simply incorrect information.
Which one? Also, do i have to ask for permission? #cashu is permissionless.
Cashu is not permissionless unless you are the mint operator. It is a privacy layer but you are at the mercy of whoever runs the mint.
Most of the custodial lightning wallets don't require kyc. Which ones do you think require it?