@DarthCoin12
2,608,176 sats stacked
stacking since: #166longest cowboy streak: 77npub1lxktp...zlkqpm5xlc
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin OP 7m \ parent \ on: The EU reportedly "prohibits" use of anonymous hosted Bitcoin wallets bitcoin
Did you read what I just said?
Yes, I live on Bitcoin standard for years.
What you still don't get?
A private trade is only between you and me. We can agree to use whatever we want as money in exchange, even pink shells. Is nobody's business what agreement we have.
As long as you accept my pink shells is only our business and if I am happy to pay you in pink shells, is all good.
Example of a guy that NEVER paid taxes in 30 years!
Yes is possible if you know how to play their game.
The only "weak part" in all this scam, is people consent. Many are entering in that unlawful contract without knowing the details, obeying everything a gov would say.
COMPLIANCE IS WHAT WILL KILL BITCOIN.
Why we are saying "the time passed" when in fact we are the ones that are passing through time? Time is not moving, we are the ones moving through time.
yes and they do not want that (recognize bitcoin as money), but they use these trickery like "money laundering", meanwhile they totally ignore this:
LOL but who in the right mind will use nowadays a custodial only onchain wallet?
That is stupid.
Onchain should be always only self-custodial. PERIOD.
Because onchain are ONLY for holding, long term, cold wallets. PERIOD.
You have also another scenarios:
- Greenlight - user have the keys on his device, but the LN node and funds are on a remote custodial server. The service provider cannot touch the funds, but still the user, if the service provider close the access to the server, will not be able to recover the funds.
- Breez - user have the keys to the funds, and run the node in the device, but if the central node of Breez shuts down, is not so easy to recover the funds.
- Mutiny - user have the keys on his device, but many users still use the default domain app (mutinywallet.com). Service provider manage the node infrastructure, but user still have full control of the keys. but if that domain get busted user can't recover his funds.
- LNBits - service provider offer lndhub accounts and have full control of the funds. The user have only a simple key to access that account, no option to recover them in any way.
- Hosted channels - user have the keys to his funds but service provider still can close the access to the funds.
I will name "self-custodial" a wallet that the user:
- have full control over the keys
- have full control of the app hosting (his own server or mobile device)
- have option to recover his funds easily into another wallet
- can control all the access to his funds and manage it by himself
All the rest that do not comply these aspects will be in the custody of somebody else. You, the user are just their slave.
In my sincere opinion, I think this is a good thing for LN.
Now all those obsessed coinjoiners will look to the LN with other eyes.
Finally they will see the LIGHT...ning.
You are worried / scared too much. Is exactly what they want... the fear of the people. They feed from it.
Here you have also a selected list of deep explanations,
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/sovereignman/
in the channel description you have more links to study
including a 5parts seminar about trusts.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/KFsmRk5aO2TH/
Not sure if you studied enough the Silk Road case. This is similar to it.
Gov agencies were using Ross from the beginning, and now that's why they put him in jail for life so he cannot talk.
Gov agencies create "a problem", then wait for the reaction/evolving etc, then come up with a "solution".
I am suspicious that samourai team was involved from day one in this operation, helping gov agencies for years to accumulate data, create tools and also create the false impression of "privacy". They are capable to do that and also the meanings.
Now, I do not have enough information about the samourai guys being involved, but even if they weren't involved, they could be used as patsies. We do not have enough information but is possible.
This whole case stinks...
The goal is to hit hard in Bitcoin community. They want Bitcoin to be a "compliant token" run by ETFs.