20 sats \ 0 replies \ @orthwyrm 1h \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
i never really thought out it in that way, but yes i think you're right. it does give that impression.
"bailouts for the rich, bootstraps for the poor"? in reference to the boomer meme.
heh, i've been debating the opposite. buying a house is the "done" thing for people my age. but the opportunity cost of deploying capital for the deposit, which could otherwise reside in bitcoin, is very real.
rent vs. buy is a very interesting debate when viewed from the bitcoin lens.
my oh my.
you have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding as to how LN works at even a basic level and compound this by acting like an insufferable prick, when all i'm doing is trying to help you because you asked.
the only dead end is this conversation.
not sure i follow. the channel you own is private, i.e. not for routing. so you use it for spending and receiving, not for earning routing fees. phoenix take a small cut each time you make a transaction for providing the service, which is how they make a profit.
hmm haven't really thought about it. not sure it's currently possible to link phoenix but i could be mistaken.
unless i'm mistaken, phoenix also alerts the user if their invoice exceeds inbound capacity and that it will trigger an on-chain fee. seems reasonable and am not sure what else they could really do to prevent users from incurring accidental costs.
agreed about sending on-chain wrecking inbound liquidity though. it's happened to me...!
phoenix is all about operating a single, well-connected channel. from this you can send and receive both lightning and on-chain (via splicing).
i think that out of all non-custodial lightning wallets, phoenix is probably the most user friendly. but due to this automation i suppose it is also more expensive to operate compared to an advanced wallet like zeus or blixt where the user really knows what they are doing. not sure what you mean by "accidentally expensive".
fwiw i am a happy phoenix user, it just works.
so uh
which member of stacker news is the half-naked man in Windows 95 apparel shooting fireworks from his hips?
the "good" forms of trust you allude to have a secondary function of building relationships in a community, which of course is valued as we are social animals.
i don't see how the logic can extend to an impersonal system such as bitcoin, especially as it's in competition with the equally impersonal fiat system. trust minimisation is simply good systems design in this case, and i reject harari's framing that bitcoin is unusual for having this attribute; the true anomaly is the trust required in the fiat system.
luv me bitcoins
luv me lightnin'
luv me nostruh
'ate shitcoins
'ate ordinals
'ate redditors (not racist just don't like 'em)
simple as
new story i believe, although the plot was pretty basic. the main draw of the game was the online multiplayer aspect of it. you'd go around in teams hunting for rare monster drops, grinding levels, that sort of thing.
these days it would be considered very rudimentary for the genre, but personally i like that simplistic charm. one of those games where you just sort of turn your brain off as you go around farming monsters and the like, y'know? good music and atmosphere to it too.
the monster i posted above is an ob lily, infamous for his one-hit-kill move and spreading paralysis around like an asshole.