Sure sounds better than custodial lightning with no privacy.
nostr:npub1lnms53w04qt742qnhxag5d6awy7nz6055flnmjkr6jg39hm86dlq7arrnt
Thoughts on Fedimint?
Every balance of a custodial wallet should be ecash. Cashu or Fedimint. If you’re not holding your keys, let’s at least offer privacy.
Excuse me, sir. Have you heard about Fedimint yet? No changes to base layer needed.
A Fedimint could easily pre-coordinate nonces to be used in FROSTr. Shared consensus between Fedimint guardians is already being done.
#Fedimint nostr community (also subreddit type thing)
Just wait until they hear about eCash…
https://learnFedimint.com for when you’re ready. Or just ping me on nostr. 😊
Hello Waffle!
Might I entice you to learn about the federated ecash implementation called #fedimint?
#LearnFedimint
You can! :)
each data string of eCash is signed by the #fedimint. On your client, you'll have the pubkey of the fedimint. You can use the pubkey to validate the signed value, X, and other data (need to learn what is encoded!) of the ecash note. Then take the notes to the mint when you're online to redeem them for new ones of the same value X (aka reissue) so now only you know the secret ecash data string for value X.
Since it's just data that can be printed on paper, you only need to verify a signature, which can be done offline with minimal compute requirements (mobile phones).
This does create a race condition with the sender, because if they redeem it first, then the receiver can lose it. I think client reputation and federation moderation will help deter this attack since the tradeoffs for custody would be of proportionate to value transacted or phsyically close enough for "proof of punch".
Streaming in Fedimint Discord. Writing tutorial docs.
chat.fedimint.org
eCash is offline capability. It's just a string of data with a client that knows the pubkey of the mint to verify the signature on the eCash is valid.
LN, you have to manage liquidity. eCash on Fedimint, you do not. FM has LN Gateways which are LN node that have their own operators and mange their own liquidity. Similarly, Guardians are already trusted to manage your "system". I would expect similar relationships with LN Gateways.
Come check out my stream on zap.stream!
nostr:naddr1qqjrsenz8qcx2vek95mnxvmp956rgdtr943xydps95ervvn9vfjrvd3sxv6rqq3qeaz6dwsnvwkha5sn5puwwyxjgy26uusundrm684lg3vw4ma5c2jsxpqqqpmxwayt822
Good question!!!!
Adding to list of things I should research and answer. I don't think the Fedimint protocol supports it by default but I am certain this is on the "roadmap" (meaning I've heard it mentioned before so know people are tracking it).
I'm planning on wrapping Fedimint for Start9 which uses some fun networking tricks to do TOR for things that don't have it implemented, so perhaps I'll land an answer sooner than later.
Q: Is it possible to send E-Cash directly to a user of another federation, and if not, why not?
A: Fedimint payments surface as LN payments already. You can transact directly ecash but with a LN gateway provider, all payments are LN by default.
User A wants to revive eCash and hits a gateway of Mint A and receives an invoice to provide to User B of Mint B. Mint B’s gateway takes the invoice and does all the normal LN stuff. When the transaction settles, Mint B issues the eCash to User B.
Behind the scenes, both Mint gateways have contracts to swap eCash for LN sats or vice versa, depending on directionality.
In short, if both federations have LN gateways, it is possible to send between them. Just not using the offline ecash system. HOWEVER, if the ecash is sent offline from A to B. B could go to Mint A and claim the ecash then route out to their own Mint or LN wallet.
At what level?
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/what-is-the-future-of-bitcoin-privacy
This is a decent one.
If you listen to podcasts where they talk about #fedimint or #cashu, you’re likely to hear an explanation of eCash.
What does nostr want to know about #fedimint?