Don’t tell nostr:npub12rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sf485vg
Discussion
too soon
?
Just talking shit about the lack of UTXO ownership in Cashu. Great project though.
gotcha. Just fyi, UTXOs don't exist in lightning, Ark, and chains like ethereum either.
TIL utxos don’t exist in lightning 😂 bro what
Wasn’t gonna argue…
arguing about semantics is left curve anyway. if you know how LN works, we probably agree on most things
I can see what you're doing, its just very misleading. you of course need to own a UTXO to create a funding transaction.
then you pivoted to "utxos don't exist on lightning" when were were talking about utxo ownership.
great straw man tactic to confuse people though.
zero motivation to convince you, I wasn’t even having a conversation with you in the first place. go fight with someone else.
whatever man, generally lying to people about tech is not a good look, you are starting to sound like a scammer.
it has been like this ever since cashu
calling them instant and “trustless”, misrepresenting their properties, replacement for LN, while proof-of-reserves was going to come soon
its really offputting. I like the tech and I was thinking abou using it for things like poker chips, but I'm not a fan of liars and i'm getting huge shitcoin vibes from most cashu people i interact with. maybe I'll just stick to lightning dev.
any day now
I have also told calle early on before this started, to change protocol design decisions. right now it is a hack on top of a hack which makes me unwilling to touch it
for example, instead of a general script system, there is a dedicated type for each use case, even though back in 2023 I told them this was a bad idea
nutzaps for example are inherently worse as well, either the receiver has to pay the cost of retrieving the sats from the sender’s mint (which can refuse) while saying they did a valid zap, or the sender has to swap between mints (why not just use LN?)
ah yeah I ran into the same issue trying to think about how I would implement ecash payment handling for lmzap
i still think it might be a nice option for privacy conscious services if the users only other option is custodial lightning.
its more of a burden for the merchant IMO due to the mint swap and finality issues.
I think a protocol for service credits handling that is designed only for that purpose is infinitely more valuable
never said those things except that it’s instant. go fight with someone else buddy.
I signed everything I said here btw, just quote it
> Censorship resistant
> Freedom tech
> Offline payments
