One potential avenue I'd love to hear more thoughts and skepticism on is the viability of the current P2P exchanges out there, what could be improved, etc.
Discussion
+☝️
Also I tried to ⚡️ but keeps getting stuck. Been ⚡️ing fine with others just prior & post the issue with yours. Not sure if it’s my end 🤷😂🤙.
Think my setup is working? CLN has been a little flaky for me this weekend but a quick test worker AFAICT!
I’m not able to ⚡️ the 📝 but I was able to via your profile ⚡️ link FYI.
Well, most of the volume in P2P exchanges (bisq, robosats, peach, etc) gets settled through banking. So I would be concerned about how a draconian CBDC deployment could impact the scene.
As an antidote to that, it would be great if more real-life meetups and communities pop everywhere. A social web of people meeting in meatspace will endure a lot of oppression.
Hell yeah, very good points! For now as long as there isn't a clear connection to Bitcoin in the P2P banking there is usually a lot of freedom when not doing crazy amounts, and I expect that to extend to CBDCs at least for a while.
But for now cash and USPS money orders are by far the most private and permissionless methods.
And yes, ultimately the most resilient scenario is Bitcoiners helping each other in local areas and acting as the on and off-ramps directly, over E2EE platforms like Signal and SimpleX for coordination.
There’s a difficult-to-avoid drawback of using KYC’d legacy payment methods (Zelle, PayPal, strike, CashApp, etc.) to buy your kyc-free, p2p Bitcoin.
Doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing, but it’s certainly a weakness in the overall privacy structure.
Yet cash in person has its own risks and inconveniences. Not something I really see an answer to.
Liquidity depth is also limited. Not that there are that many individuals who want to buy ten bitcoins p2p right now, but still. It’s limited.
Key difference to KYC exchanges is there is no link between on-chain activity or a purchase of Bitcoin to the banks etc, only to the P2P partner themselves.
Still not perfect, but a massive step up! Cash or gift cards bought with cash are really the best but a bit of a PITA for sure.
Definitely agree there!
It doesn’t protect the seller as much, if there are jurisdictional laws against selling p2p (which there shouldn’t be, yet seems like there are for tax collection purposes), but as a buyer I wouldn’t be that worried
Hi Seth I know you recently changed to focusing on bitcoin but I do have a very noob monero question for you if you don’t mind. What would be the difference in terms of traceability if I used kraken to buy monero then sent that monero to my personal wallet then spent that monero? vs buying from local monero which I imagine would go straight to my personal wallet and then spent that monero? (besides the kyc kraken would have are they a able do some kind of forward tracing?
I think P2P exchanges are unlikely to ever be anything more than niche services used by enthusiasts.
The reality is most people want a single face that they can trust when transacting, not to seek out a new anonymous identity for every trade.
I think this is a common misnomer, as most people using P2P platforms like #[5] or HodlHodl go back to the same trader they've established trust and raport with, and often take trades off platform shortly after.
Another benefit of face to face cash trades is building relationships with local Bitcoiners while establishing completely unlinkable swaps of fiat and Bitcoin.
Fair enough, but I'm talking more about widespread usage by normal people. Most of them are going to want a single unified experience that can be guaranteed every time they use the service.
I think if the exchange can find a way to play more of a role as a middleman it might help (e.g., provide a consistent means of payment rather than the current quasi-barter system of Zelle, CashApp, Strike, etc., etc.), although then it ceases to be P2P.
Interesting, the idea of going back to the same seller for new sats. Introduces both a lower fraud risk with a potentially trusted/reputable contact, as well as a greater single-point-of-failure risk if you’re buying Bitcoin in a locale where it’s outlawed, due to the potential for UC/sting ops
Really? People are buying from the same sellers? How do you know?
I understand the impetus of this line of thinking, but I think it's somewhat misguided. Current P2P exchanges are for enthusiasts and speculators .
For Bitcoin to have a future, it must be useful.
People must be paid in #btc and merchants must be able and willing to accept it.
Remittances sent over BTC (1st-world currency -- BTC -- 3rd-world currency) with two P2P transactions would be too slow and expensive, negating the benefit.
Hyperinflationary countries like Argentina would be a great use case, but because the demand is so high to get out of the national currency, fees would be high and governments are incentivized to ban P2P (further driving up fees).
P2P is a band-aid on a hemorrhaging wound. The surgical suture is direct transactions in Bitcoin. (Not a doctor)
P2p Xmr to btc needs to improve. Btc to Xmr only atomic swaps make it appear "rug pully"
Oh yeah and Bisq is an abosolute nightmare of bloat and poor UI/UX.
What do you think is the biggest shortcoming of Bisq?
All the steps and learning curve to just get set up. The load time for everything. Having to switch tabs to set up an account before even looking at offers and their requirements.
it's a clumsy program that does too much. It should do one or two things well, list the market prices, good. List offers, good.
Also be a DAO and token manager. Not good. Have the Dao stuff on a seperate program for people who care.
Interesting. So the "next iteration" of Bisq should have less features overall. I wonder if all users should arbitrate for each other to lessen the need for a DAO. Maybe after a couple of buys/sells on the p2p exchange.
Or have a "Light" or "explore" version.
Something that allows deal finding ect without all the baggage.
Other platforms accomplish positive behavior incentives without the bloat or a DAO.
