Fair play to @DarthCoin who is always banging the drum for the correct use of lightning
This piece explores pretty much what DC is trying to get over to everyone
I'm at fault for using Rizful as my daily but it's got great NWC support but that is no excuse and most users are not aware of the visibility that ark and spark have
The author does lend some support to the possibilities of ark which im sure the dark lord will vehemently disagree with
They both have different leaks. Same game.
The question is:
What does the public chain see?
What does the operator see?
What does the router see?
What does the counterparty see?
What leaks at deposit, withdrawal, invoice, gateway, or exit?Who Wins By Threat Model?Who Wins By Threat Model?
There is no universal winner. There is only the least bad leak for your situation.
They are not L2's
There are 0 benefits to these vs. a traditional custodial SQL database, these only exist for these scam corps to try to evade the regulator...
But the regulator will eventually squeeze their heads, and their centralized Lightning swaps will give them plenty of data to offer up in their settlement agreements. With scale they can largely deanonymize the Lightning network. It's important that few people use these scams.
To lazy or poor to open a channel? That's fine, just use SQL, it's more decentralized than these fake L2s.
Yes, this piss me off more than anything, calling those networks as L2s.
This is the main reason why all these craps show how scams they are, lying people.
If they would just say what they are and their scope, will be nothing wrong, people will understand and will treat it as such, but instead they onnly try to sneak into weak people mind with lies.
As in, they don't allow you to unilaterally leave the system?
That's my understanding of why, at present, only LN is an L2. Don't know the specifics of Ark, Spark, etc, hence my question.
IF they will be a real L2 will operate directly with LN. But it does not !
You need to a bridge/swap in order to move funds from those networks / side chains into LN.
Let's be clear: LN is a DIRECT network with the mainnet, it actually operate directly on the mainnet, thing that those other networks does not.
The thing that "you can unilaterally exit" but you still need a submarine swap provider it doesn't help with anything, you are in the same shit.
People think that could avoid fees and managing liquidity by using these crap networks, but they forgot how bad model was Muun wallet with their shitty submarine swaps for every tx ! Same will happen with all these idiocies of Spark, Ark, Liquid etc...
PEOPLE WILL BE FUCKED SO HARD ! Because the KYC hammer will come soon for these networks.
They are not peer to peer, they're closed networks with a central coordinator
Unilateral exit is possible in some edge-circumstances, mainly using them as a chain wallet, but not as the fake Lightning wallets they're billed as.
Yes I should have tagged you too tbf you're just as passionate about the correct use of lightning
So, with LN I can solve 99% of the mentioned caveats (clean channel inputs, clean channel outputs, no key reuse (also not for lnd)) by hygiene in practice. But can we do the same on the other things mentioned? I'm not convinced.
Great process beats good defaults.
That's why SN is such a useful arena because there are many Bitcoiners like yourself and Darth and Justin to name a few not forgetting the too many to name, who intimately understand lightning and it's potential if used correctly
As I said I'm guilty of using a custodial solution purely for the NWC reliability, I should revisit that and look at an improvement
Rizful is OK as a temporary/decoy solution. I use it in the past but I stopped when they start adding Tether and shitcoins. I will boycott anything that do such things. Like Alby too.
FUCK'EM'ALL
I'm not that intimate in my Lightning understanding!
imho NWC (and all
wallet connectprotocols like that) is a feature that reduces privacy in favor of convenience. So is your npub, your SN account (though that is also a 10x cost saver) and generally all static keys and identifiers.I've split my NWC and my production LN wallet (and the entire sat stream, except for funding the NWC wallet.)
Am I reading this as you have a dedicated Ln wallet with a healthy balance that never touches NWC or any permissioned allowance protocol
And an 'nwc' wallet that is only topped up with a small amount of funds?
If so, that is how I do it too
Almost, yes. Not a "dedicated" wallet because I cycle node keys and I rarely slave away in a fiat mine, but yes, separate.