FYI, he forgot the last part:

"Moreover, the paper was released in 2021, and some of its assumptions are no longer true, particularly these two: “the route to the destination in LN is constructed solely by the payment sender [and all] clients generally aim to find the shortest path in the network.” (page 11)

Since that time, rendezvous routing has become very common: the latest versions of lnd do it via the Blinded Routes flag, CLN and Eclair do it via bolt12, and anyone with a “legacy” lightning wallet can do it via lnproxy. Thanks to rendezvous routing, there are many cases today where the sender no longer picks the shortest path to the destination; indeed, when rendezvous routing is used, he does not know the destination. So the attacks outlined in this paper simply wouldn’t work today in many cases, due to the assumptions being wrong."

We can’t stop them from running a full node (or a million full nodes), nor can they stop us. If a hard fork happens, it will result in two competing tokens, and then the market will decide. If their token loses value, they will rig the rules, and if they rig the rules, their token will lose value. In end the original token will prevail, as long as there is one person running a node to support it. If you believe in Bitcoin, run a full node and become unruggable.

Based on the abstract, it’s another tool to grant power to a central authority which can deem transactions and users lawful or unlawful, further reducing decentralization. Not a fan.

This was my immediate thought as well.

Yes. They will release their own currency, rug each other, people will look to bitcoin. As Matt Odell says: "Bitcoin adoption is a series of ever increasing rugs" or something like that.

Sounds good, thank for help. I have sparrow installed on another laptop, but haven't configured it yet. I'll look into that and setting up electrs.