pull down to refresh
i agree with that.
I just equally hate how many in here assume that the Lightning UX is great and perfected, and if you can't use it self-custodially you're dumb: "the problem is you", or even better when they say ""bitcoin education"" is needed, as if anybody had to learn TCP/IP or SMTP and have ""internet education"" to use consumer products like Gmail.
For sure. Critics ask Spark to broadcast the full picture while critics don't broadcast the inconvenient parts of their position either.
I'm fond of telling founders that murky problems beget murky solutions.[1] Spark is a murky solution to a murky problem. They aren't responsible for the problem. They didn't create it.
usually the context is that they haven't defined the problem they are trying to solve well enough. but it applies generally, to problems that are out of our control or aren't well understood, too. ↩
Are you saying that each operator runs their own federated statechain? If not, did I say something that requires you pointing out there are multiple validators/signers?
I don't mean to sound like I'm dissing Spark. They are offering a solution to a serious problem in lightning and I'm grateful for it. Afaict no one is dissing Spark. We are, or at least I am, expressing frustration with how the product is marketed (and if you check the receipts, the same folks have the same complaints about "self-custodial" Liquid swaps).
Why are we so frustrated? Because the self-custodial lightning problem isn't actually solved yet, and broadcasting that it is risks us never actually solving the problem.
Also, it tends to inflame things when Spark-aligned folks respond to these frustrations with non-sequitur virtues, albeit real ones.