The state went after Samourai and Tornado Cash, those were actually non-custodial unlike Spark. Spark lying to it's users to lie to the state by proxy can only work to the extent they don't flaunt how clever they think they are.
"Show me the man and I'll show you the crime", being a transmitter is just one of a countless potential charges.
There's zero reason to think the state will be arsed to go after Uncle Jim nodes. The scale of Spark is a much more likely target regardless of their crypto-theater. When their heads do inevitably get squeezed over something, their scale of Lightning swaps will hand the state the data it needs to deanonymize swaths of the network.
Further, if they do go down, how many things break? How many Lightning businesses see their traffic drop off precipitously because one API became unreachable?
Using Spark is not just indifference towards trusting them with diminimis amounts, but is an active attack on Lightning itself because of systemic risk it presents.
at scale*
... which is the real problem
The state went after Samourai and Tornado Cash, those were actually non-custodial unlike Spark. Spark lying to it's users to lie to the state by proxy can only work to the extent they don't flaunt how clever they think they are.
"Show me the man and I'll show you the crime", being a transmitter is just one of a countless potential charges.
There's zero reason to think the state will be arsed to go after Uncle Jim nodes. The scale of Spark is a much more likely target regardless of their crypto-theater. When their heads do inevitably get squeezed over something, their scale of Lightning swaps will hand the state the data it needs to deanonymize swaths of the network.
Further, if they do go down, how many things break? How many Lightning businesses see their traffic drop off precipitously because one API became unreachable?
Using Spark is not just indifference towards trusting them with diminimis amounts, but is an active attack on Lightning itself because of systemic risk it presents.