Lightning is cool and has good privacy but it lacks in larger tx size and in UX for self custodial solutions. Monero works perfectly for larger tx size and easy UX as bitcoin onchain. Is ok to use both I do. Lightning and Monero both have uses for example spending Monero is easy with cakepay, anywhere that accepts visa online you can buy a cakepay visa then plug into payment basically anywhere online. Lightning has robosats and LNMarkets and Nostr. Monero I can swap into Bitcoin or Lightning without leaving the wallet.
Discussion
Iโve never had a problem using lighting self custodial or in size. Iโve sent 1 million sat transactions on it. Anything larger than that ONchain is preferable anyhow. If I really need an intermediate solution I could just use liquid. No need for Monero.
huh?
obviously theres a need for private value transfer of greater than 1M sats.
Yea 1M sats is not a large tx
Liquid is definitely less private than monero and also is custodial, so liquid is better privacy than on chain but you sacrifice custody and itโs inferior to moneros privacy while maintaining custody.
Iโve never โhadโ to use liquid, but when I did play with it I could swap from on chain or lightning in or out. I couldnโt imagine someone being able track funds through the various transfers. That being said I wasnโt attempting to hide funds. But if youโve swapped from onchain to lightning, then converted to liquid to do whatever, then went back out onchain or even a different Lightning wallet I doubt there is anyone that could track that. I couldnโt even imagine the layers of access youโd need to follow along. And if youโve swapped using non-custodial wallets along the way I would argue that it would probably be impossible.
Yea itโs probably hard to trace through all those layers. I just think Monero can be beneficial as part of Opsec. Privacy and security go hand in hand.
You seem like a nice enough guy. I usually donโt engage in these kind of conversations. I guess my main point is Iโve seen plenty of large payments go through lightning. And Bitcoin that has entered the circular economy is probably impossible to track because itโs bouncing through so many sophisticated and unsophisticated hands all over the world. Even when it hits a custodial service it kind of washes away its previous history and starts over as Bitcoin from that custodian.
Like if some pushed onchain through WOS or Muun or something, then spends to 20 different people. On chain it looks like it just stayed with the custodian until a completely different person requests onchain transactions. Itโs all a miasma of transactions where people tracking the funds only get little pieces of information that couldnโt possibly be used to paint a complete transaction history.
I would probably agree with you if most UTXOs were used p2p and not purchased through centralized KYC exchanges where they can very efficiently track history. And a lot of UTXOs donโt move a lot. So itโs not as hard to track those either. I donโt think lightning does large transactions maybe 10,000,000 sats max I donโt think most channels have that type of liquidity. Most are smaller at 10M sats isnโt really โlargeโ maybe medium.
Large is certainly subjective.
But even 2million sat channels probably cover almost all purchases. Itโs rare that the average person in the world is spending over 1 million sats on a single item. Most transactions are probably less than 100k sats. I usually open 2 mil sat channels for that reason. If I have to make a bigger purchase I just do it onchain.
Yes but channel size/liquidit it is still a limitation that Monero does not have and if you revert to onchain bitcoin you have no real privacy which the post was about maintaining privacy.
