pull down to refresh

It depends how much work we let "similar" do. The analogy is fine, in that most people probably will opt for the lower technical hurdle of outsourcing that function.
I think running your own email server is a much more foreign concept for people. Holding your own keys isn't that different from keeping track of your passwords for other stuff.
Holding your own keys isn't that different from keeping track of your passwords for other stuff.
Yea it's a bad analogy for L1, email servers are synchronous, requiring some hefty configuration to route messages. Bitcoin is asynchronous and the network relays instead of routes. Apples and oranges.
The analogy of an email server in the context of Lightning is more appropriate, and I use that a lot myself since Lightning is synchronous, there are considerations for routing via the network.
Even a Lightning node though is orders of magnitude simpler than an email server, that's not to say we should expect everyone to run one, but we should expect and strive for Lightning to be orders of magnitude more decentralized and less permissioned than email.
reply
119 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fenix 17h
I agree. He was unfortunate in his choice of words when he talked about adoption, because when I introduce someone to bitcoin the first interaction is through custodial LN. In that case running an email server is a good analogy for running your own Lightning channel.
reply
Holding your own keys isn't that different from keeping track of your passwords for other stuff.
100%
reply
Holding your own keys isn't that different from keeping track of your passwords for other stuff.
Agreed. This makes a lot of sense to me. The main difference though is the "no one is coming to help you" factor of bitcoin keys. People are very used to the process of resetting passwords. It will be hard to get people into the no-recovery mode of Bitcoin.
reply
Yeah, I think it will be more about outsourcing risk than outsourcing technical expertise.
reply