What does "fully custodial" mean to you?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Love adding new terms and expecting it to be widely understood... must we revisit this again?

Self-custodial - you own it

Hardware wallet - you own it

Paper wallet - you own it

Offline wallet - you own it

Hot wallet - you own it for now

Custodial - you don't own it

Coinbase - you don't own it

Someone else's lightning node - you don't own it

Someone else's mint - you don't own it

Non-custodial - fuck if I know

Fully custodial - fuck if I know

The mint is custodied by someone other than you. The node that backs the mint is also custodied by someone other than you. The text strings (tokens) that allow me to interact with the mint can be saved offline but are useless without the mint, and the mint has no monetary value without the node.

Cool, was just checking if the same would be true for Liquid, Stacks, Fedimint, wBTC, etc... yup.

Don't mean to say the risks are comparable across all these. Cashu obviously has the highest risk out of these.

Just to be clear I'm not saying or meaning to imply that I think people shouldn't use cashu or other custodial services. Only that they need to understand that they are indeed custodial and that there is a level of risk involved because of that. My original post in this thread was prompted by another thread in which I said self-custodial zaps are not viable for onboarding new Nostr users, and I received replies saying "cashu fixes this" so I can only assume some people think it is equivalent to self custodial bitcoin.

I don't think that's what they mean but I see your point. What they probably mean is that Cashu is better than most other custodial systems.

Perhaps that's what they mean. It doesn't always seem that's what they mean, but maybe.