I don't think that's what they're saying.
I think they're suggesting that LN offers choice by way of having a product which companies can then offer by way of custody, but also said product can be utilised without such companies and taken up by ourselves.
Whereas in Liquid you can't, at all, have that same choice. The infrastructure is a federation (of 16?) corporate entities. Users have no way to run their own infrastructure.
As much as we're going through a rough patch with lightning, truth is, EVERYONE is free to take their sats and run their own nodes, especially nowadays with things like nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 Wallet allowing anyone to run their own mobile wallet (it's still in beta, but close.) - That's the distinguishing feature here and as much I have my own uncertainties about lightning, it's something worth protecting rather than jumping boat to something that just seems to work, potentially because it has very little usage compared, without really looking behind those curtains.
And that's great, but how does limiting user signups encourage self-hosting AND the usage of Alby services?
If people can't sign-up, they'll either look for another LSP, or run a node themselves - Great. But how does that benefit Alby?
I guess my question is, can NWC (the only self-hostable Alby service) be utilised without an Alby account?
Ah, so you're taking what you're expecting will be needed to close the channel too?
Same band if you can believe it..
Still love their old stuff.
New stuff's alright.
nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5
Question.
Zeus Wallet states it'll take 90k sats to open a lightning channel if received over lightning.
Given a high priority TX right now is ~40k, would I be correct in assuming that you take ~50k sats as the actual fee for opening a TX?
With that logic, is it right that it costs considerably more to open a lightning channel than make an on-chain TX?
Thanks for your response.
Let's see..
"we have limited creation of new Alby Accounts" - So much for Bitcoin's mission on inclusion..
"Introducing invite codes for signups helps us to **selectively** onboard new users." - Almost seems like censorship..
I'm not stating you've added no value to the eco-system(s), you absolutely have and I personally recognise that, but the way it's been done with such focus on custodianship, is alarming at best, a bad omen at worst.
Frame it as an "update", but you took a step back in the service you provide by limiting WHO can use said service, a service whose infrastructure was already faulty relying on this amount of centralisation.
Highly recommend RoboSats!
No KYC, DCA-able.
Especially with a congested mempool.
Back to ⚡ Zapping ⚡
⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡⚡
You're tainting those sats with your real identity though.
Remember how the US government confiscated gold in the 1930?
That's true, it HAS remained accessible throughout, and tools for the ease of channel management are being developed.
I suppose as I've been triggered lately by seeing a lot of software that people flock to, which only allows centralised nodes and promotes centralisation of users' funds. Prime example being the Primal client on web which I ended up leaving.
I'm finding myself much more active on #Nostr and #StackerNews lately.
I blame the high #mempool fees.
Less time to spend on on-chain purchases and less toying around with my backend.
Speaking of, I'm running out of sats on lightning soon and those fees look monstrous right about now.
Today is the 1st birthday of Snort, its crazy to think its been a year already. A random weekend project turned into a full time project.
I wouldn't still be here if it wasn't for all the support I've received over the past 12 months, so I have to start by saying thank you to everyone who has donated and kept the train rolling, and of course special thanks to HRF and nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f for making it possible to keep building on Nostr.
It is hard to imagine where we will be in a year's time, but I hope that Nostr will be stronger than ever.
Finally, here is a time-lapse video of every version of Snort since last year.
Congrats and happy anniversary to Snort!
When it's not your keys, suddenly 1BTC DOES NOT EQUAL 1BTC.
Pathetic theft. And yet, people did decide to give up their keys...
#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=673x481&blurhash=rbH2%2Bq%25%24JDM%7BnhxtNGbcn%24%3Fws.oekBaybIWBofWCJDRiMxt7flRks%3AoeR*E2NHjZkDf%2Bj%3FWCWBfkxYRjoebcNIoJofaebH%24%24ocxtadaKWXozodWB&x=c748b592504a019bd63980fd8a2c70e1a0cd7bca822bbd5ea480c766498e4315To an extent, I agree. There is a definitely a nature-like mechanism to Bitcoin's timechain.
But I also think we shouldn't let ourselves become complacent. I think that's what happened with the centralisation of LN and in general any entertained L2 solutions/proposals.
Economically Unspendable Bitcoin UTXOs.
The current reality.
Great tool for people using wallets that don't make these things apparent (just switch wallet at that point).
https://blog.lopp.net/economically-unspendable-bitcoin-utxos/
We're still onboarding the average person onto centralised payment solutions with LN. It needs to stop, and it could start with Nostr clients.
Snort is client-agnostic. But for instance, Primal, one of the most used clients, fully custodial. LN Infrastructure is not accessible enough for us to not need reliance on LSPs either.
I think there's something telling about the fact that the Bitcoin whitepaper is 9 pages long and solved a world-class-problem, while Lightning was so complicated for the average user it ended up centralising itself.
Common answers:
- Increase time preference.. But you run the risk of locking bitcoin for a ridiculous amount of time.
- RoboSats.. But LN is increasingly centralised, over-engineered, and you still end up having to pay the fees for on-chain cold storage.
The one true answer:
- Come up with a beautifully elegant as-simple-as-bitcoin way of TXing faster and cheaper by improving the concept of UTXOs themselves.
I realise Nostr is inherently censorship-resistent, a tor integration would further help withy privacy though.
As someone who lives in a CGNAT network, I have my ways to get around it, but other people on CGNAT unfortunately won't be able to expose 6090 without third-party services and specific VPN services - Which comes with a lot of dependencies.
The most 'least-dependencies' way will likely be to create a tor hidden-service on the localhost that redirects 6090 into a tor tunnel, but this won't be an option for many.
Great work either way, it's an amazing start, looking forward to seeing how it evolves.
Great listen from the #Samourai & #Ronin teams.
"Mass-adoption is the poison pill, you should be careful what you wish for. When we do actually see mass adoption it 's not going to be pretty. We don't have the tech in place to combat the regulatory response. (...) We still have a fully transparent blockchain, we don't have confidential transactions, we don't have the tech in place."
Lots of work to do still. #Bitcoin