How would that stop secondary accounts from sending to their primary ones? That would also force more centralization no?
Discussion
You can't prevent that, but it is irrelevant. We should not care about zap counts, but we should care about having a public registry of a received zap that matches an actual payment, because that is necessary to make zaps useful for things other than tipping.
Zaps evolving from tipping to being used for non tip related things (advertising, help, impromptu jobs) is the next step. And I can’t wait 🤙💜
Agreed w/ #[5] ~ most people I know are fiat-reliant. They don’t know what a lightning wallet is, let alone a zap. My friends alone are just now investing in crypto.
People gotta learn how to crawl before they can think about walking. 🤙🏼
Ln payment is separate from registering of zaps in a Nostr note. The hand off process as you noted can be manipulated and one way to get around that would be to natively implement wallets in each of the clients like Damus and Nostrgram. There by avoiding Centralized NIP-57 verifiers. If we go NIP-57 verification route then in the future they want fees to support. Crypto is already full of middlemen trying to get paid for a function.
Words of wisdom.
There is no way to ensure a zap matches an actual payment.
At best, it can loosely represent a payment if both sender and receiver are honest. But then, they might as well use a more private payment method, like LNURL.
I suppose the best scenario zaps can aim for is an honest receiver + a fixed enough zap protocol, such that senders cannot fake it. Then build on top.
But IMO that comes with so much downside (centralization, newbies seeing zaps as LN standard, newbies being scammed by receivers who fake their zap counters, etc) that its not worth it.