this is wishful thinking. people just want something like monero that actually works and doesn't require thought. believing that people will coinjoin into a lighting channel is laughable when they could just use monero and not worry about if they incorrectly did their opsec with bitcoin
reply
If the wallet does it automatically, then the experience would be equal, no?
reply
Not in my opinion because vendors on darkweb markets don't want to even risk it, so they don't even want to accept bitcoin at all. From my point of view it doesn't matter what bitcoiners like peter think about it, because the reality is that vendors and users are just telling each other not to use bitcoin at all now on every dark web forum like dread
reply
It'd be pretty easy for darknets to standardize a special address standard that was only supported by conjoin and private lightning wallets.
But just doing Monero is certainly simpler.
reply
Wouldn't that make it easier to trace money flows to DNMs?
reply
No. Your thinking script pub key, which is different than what an address standard is.
reply
Is he saying that LN gives you “very good privacy” if everyone just used their own hosted wallets?
I watched a LN developer give a speech about why privacy is in a bad state on LN and none of them were related to where wallets were hosted.
Maybe the clip just went too fast but this seems wacky.
reply
yeah this seems like a very low-quality youtube post... "Monero cant scale. Lightning can. Unhosted wallets FTW"
we really need @moneroshill back here
reply
Sorry, but it's a simple fact that Monero doesn't scale. Every transaction is on chain, and you need to keep data for every transaction indefinitely to prevent double spends. That's why Monero can't do Bitcoin-style pruning.
reply
You have both good arguments, monero doesn't scale and it's a fact. Tho you don't have to care if you made a coinjoin utxo to open channels, or opening a Phoenix wallet and delete it after a few uses, like Odell advises. Because LN receiver side privacy just sucks for now. But once it will be fixed (silent routing, bolt12, etc ...), won't be much reasons to use Monero. Other thing is LN can scale but need many improvements before we can talk about mass adoption. DN markets don't want to hear about LN for now ...
Let's see how it goes
reply
Question is if you think scaling Monero is easier and will result in a more simple codebase. I think it likely will, but as you say, we shall see. I am rooting for LN
reply
also., monero transactions are way bigger than bitcoin transactions, its just not viable for the whole world.
reply
The monero transaction size is afaik comparable to 3 BTC transactions that achieve the same privacy/anonymity (i.e. for conjoin you need multiple transaction end to end)
reply
What is the average size of a coinjoin transaction? Monero is about 2kb right now I believe
reply
you don't need to coinjoin every bitcoin transaction, if privacy is your main goal, you just don't kyc your bitcoin in the first place.
Also, lightning is pretty private if you know what you are doing.
reply
You could apply that same exact critique to Bitcoin before Lightning came about.
Well guess what: Layer 2 is literally being researched for Monero right now.
Speaking of on-chain transactions though, the txn size continues to get smaller with each monero release.
If you dislike Monero because it’s simply NOT bitcoin, that is fair enough. But let’s be real here.
reply
You could apply that same exact critique to Bitcoin before Lightning came about.
Just false. Do you know how Monero ring signatures work? They necessitate the use of a 'key image', which can never be deleted, otherwise double spending is possible, and more than that - you can't "prune (most of) the blockchain and just keep the utxo set" - a finesse both common and frequently used in Bitcoin - because there is no 'utxo set' distinct from just, all the outputs in all the blocks. None of the txos are 'spent'.
reply
Monero has had pruning for a while now. https://www.getmonero.org/2019/02/01/pruning.html
If you want to critique the fact that the code improves too often and too fast, that is a different critique but a more fair one.
reply
Monero's "pruning" is not the same thing as Bitcoin's pruning.
Bitcoin can discard all transaction data from spent transactions. Monero has to retain key images from every transaction ever made.
That is fundamentally different and Monero enthusiasts like you who imply they are the same are quite frankly, lying.
reply
I’m the “enthusiast” here? I’m literally giving you accurate information. I have no hobby horse or allegiance.
Before you said Monero doesn’t allow for pruning and now you are saying it doesn’t allow for enough pruning.
Monero can prune 2/3 of the blockchain. I think that’s pretty great but if it’s not enough for you, okay that’s fine.
Now where else can we move the goalposts? Or would you prefer to make some substantive critiques instead?
Monero allows for pruning, and it is researching layer 2 (just like bitcoin did).
There are good critiques of monero and this is just muddying the waters man
reply
"Monero allows for pruning"
reply
Got a link to that speech?
reply
I think (s)he is talking about this video:
reply
yep that is the one. thanks!
reply
Does anyone know if atomic swaps work between btc and monero?
I could see BTC as the savings account, and Monero as the checking account. Only if there’s a way to swap without a centralized exchange.
reply
There are atomic swaps, but they are still pretty new and don't have a lot of liquidity https://www.getmonero.org/2021/08/20/atomic-swaps.html
reply
Yeah, this is intuitively what I thought as well. That with atomic swaps, Monero would be like a defacto-privacy-sidechain or something. The thing is, not that many people do it, to the point that you really aren't getting very good privacy out of it because if the low anonymity set.. And i think you are probably leaking timing info to whatever place/app you are pulling off your atomic swap at.
reply
TL;DR: stay humble and stack your sats KYC-free
reply