pull down to refresh
phoenixd as opposed to lnd or cln: comes with stupid easy liquidity management (i think maybe Zeus also does this, but I've never been clear whether I can use that with my own node).
but then I cannot help anyone with just connecting a wallet and I'd like to be in the know and I like testing wallets
Yes! I'm in the same boat here. Also, I want a solution I can recommend to a new user that has the user experience of custodial.
the user experience of custodial.
Getting rugged? lmao
when not rugging, custodial apps are quite pleasant
- offline receive
- receive small amounts
- no need to manage liquidity
honestly, i wouldn't mind if SN just went custodial again haha
SN is a platform where you spend sats and receive interaction. It is not custodial because it is not a wallet. SN is my counterparty, not whomever I "zap", because I zap something to make it more visible.
This probably goes fully against this latest release of k00b's work and I should just shut up.
It's a bit more complicated than that for noncustodial zaps. (As a metaphor it's fair though.)
We request an invoice from the receiver, extract the hash, then construct an invoice paid to SN's node with that same hash. Importantly, when you push money to SN's node, "paying" this invoice, we do not have the preimage to claim your payment.
To claim your payment, SN risks its own money paying the receiver to get the preimage. SN then uses this preimage to claim the money you pushed to SN.
It's an atomic split payment - part to SN, part to the receiver, and SN only gets paid if the receiver does. As far as the sats are concern, SN does what a lightning routing node does when it forwards funds.
As far as the sender can tell, they're paying SN - which is awesome because it protects the privacy/pubkey of the receiver's node/wallet. But, this also means that the sender must trust that the invoice SN serves is a wrapped invoice from the receiver.
Why not?
Sure, it sucks to potentially lose money, but you can limit the amount you're willing to lose for these quite nice properties though, no?
I’m not trying to advocate for custodial wallets, but I acknowledge that their UX is unmatched by any non-custodial wallet.
FUCK THE BANKS
This had serious HACK THE PLANET vibes
afaik the LN interface is as custodial as npubcash, i.e. you have no cryptographic / on-chain recourse when the LN channel fucks up?
So far, I have to agree. Before I went on vacation, I was looking into exactly this: how to get the presigned tx for unilateral exit when I fund my wallet via lightning, not on-chain.
Afaik, the only thing I get when I pay a lightning invoice is a LightningSendRequest. The transfer property ("leaves transfer after lightning payment was sent") might be related, but I haven't looked further into it.
This is currently blocking adding Spark to SN.
edit: Btw, I even wonder how Spark can stay trustodial via lightning. The sats must be going into some channel right? Isn't just one entity (not many) running the lightning node? Or did Spark find a way to "decentralize a lightning node"?
If there’s a way to unilaterally exit but we don’t provide it, and we don’t even store the state to provide it later, then we are to blame if stackers lose funds. If you lose funds using a custodial wallet, it’s not our fault.
Yeah that was my point above.
Ah, mhh, but for me these are two different points:
- Unilateral exit if the wallet is only ever funded via lightning
- How lightning is implemented to stay trustodial
You're right. So it's blocking because you need to know how to protect stackers, but regardless, there is still a single point of failure on every path (even if there are multiple paths, the failure is still singular within each path, and user mitigation is required to overcome it, which is as bad as custodial)
They feel like poverty due to insane ecosystem milking by <App/Goog>le[le]. PWA integration feels shitty on both platforms because thats what they want it to be: as shitty as possible so that you pay your 30% app store tax - the Goog variant does a little better than the App one and there was talk of the latter wanting to remove support all together[steve]. It's insane anyway because these smart phones don't come cheap.
Or
lndorcln. That's honestly what I should personally do as I already have servers, but then I cannot help anyone with just connecting a wallet. I won't know what works then, and I'd like to be in the know and I like testing wallets, but not custodial ones. I'm still thinking that if Blixt/Zeus would have great CLINK/NWC connectivity, then we can probably focus on reducing the energy and data consumption of their embedded LNDs.Friends don't recommend friends this, I think? lol. Also afaik the LN interface is as custodial as npubcash, i.e. you have no cryptographic / on-chain recourse when the LN channel fucks up?
The common
lestands forlarcenic empire. ↩Those earthquakes lately was Steve, the visionary inventor of PWA, rolling over in his grave at high RPM. ↩