pull down to refresh

82 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek 8 Jul \ on: @Polymarket now supports instant Bitcoin deposits over Lightning lightning

SN could have had a Spark wallet 6+ months ago, but we didn’t want to ship it without a unilateral exit.

I agreed with that decision at the time, but I’m not sure I would make the same decision today.

write
compose
2 sats \ 6 replies \ @BlokchainB 8 Jul

Wow really? Why is that?

reply
156 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 9 Jul

Spark has better trade-offs than custodial lightning, even without a unilateral exit, because it can eventually have one.

reply
2 sats \ 4 replies \ @BlokchainB 9 Jul

Eventually? who has to develop it? Spark or wallet developers?

reply
74 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 9 Jul

Doesn’t matter. Eventually is better than never.

I also trust a federation more than a guy who can’t keep his nsec secure, yet somehow runs the most popular custodial lightning wallet.

Do you not see that we’re applying double standards just because one is lightning and the other isn’t? We need to judge everything by the same yardstick, no matter what we call it.

Spark doesn’t compete with non-custodial lightning. It competes with custodial lightning.

reply
2 sats \ 2 replies \ @BlokchainB 9 Jul

Like Strike or Wallet of Satoshi? It matters in the long run. I agree with your federation point. I use liquid all the time. Every day!

reply
85 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 9 Jul

Spark is also better than Liquid. Liquid can never have a unilateral exit.

Edit: Ok, it depends on whether the federation in Liquid can also steal your money if they collaborate. I need to look that up.

reply
2 sats \ 0 replies \ @BlokchainB 9 Jul

They can but can’t spark steal as well? Isn’t their tech based upon mercury layer that used state chains? I used to swap coins on Mercury Layer before they shut it down.

reply