I’m thinking about fedi’s usecase and risks. I’m completely non-technical so please don’t take my question as a criticism as it’s only a way for me to understand the purpose of it..
Would it not be better to develop an easier lightning wallet solution to onboard non-technical people to bitcoin transactions than it is to trust guardians?
I feel we are opening the door to a rugpull. I know these people will have their reputations ruined.. but in a free permission-less system it’s still possible.. and let’s hope they don’t but we are at the mercy of hope and trust again.
Okay then let’s say that the guardians are completely incorruptible..
Would it not be a risk to have guardians on the fediment as targets either to coerce or to attack?
I know you have definitely thought this out.. i’m just thinking through it outloud while I learn about it.
There are some things about how self-custody lightning works that are notoriously difficult to obfuscate away in order to provide a good experience for non-technical users.
Phoenix wallet comes about as close as possible, but the tradeoff is footguns when the user runs out of inbound liquidity in their channel and they end up with a much larger transaction fee than they were expecting, because they had no idea they even HAD a channel, or how to manage its liquidity.
Some liquidity management can be automated, but nothing really solves the lack of remaining inbound liquidity issue. And that is a concept that many non-technical folks can't even wrap their minds around, let alone want to try and manage for themselves.
Thread collapsed