reply on: 95% of zaps are from custodial wallets. We can do better \ stacker news ~bitcoin

268 sats \ 7 replies \ @TheBTCManual 21 Mar \ on: 95% of zaps are from custodial wallets. We can do better bitcoin

100% of SN sats are custodial

so what?

439 sats \ 4 replies \ @TonyGiorgio 21 Mar

So what? I'm sure @k00b doesn't want to be legally liable for being an unregistered money service business, to open himself up to hacks stealing user funds, to be responsible at all for their money, or to see every transaction coming in and out of each user account. It doesnt matter how much it is, its fucking 2023, quit telling people to use custodians.

5 sats \ 3 replies \ @TheBTCManual 21 Mar

He can just switch the backend to be an eCash mint, calm your tits

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 21 Mar

Do eCash mints mitigate any of the legal liability as far as we know?

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheBTCManual 21 Mar

I doubt it reduces your legal liability, only deniability of how users are storing and moving funds, maybe if was a federated mint with members geographically dispersed, it could, but I am no legal expert.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @xanny 22 Mar

Running the site from a corporation registered in Belize would.

I’m not even memeing. Sideshift, Exch, and so on are Belize corporations.

Good country to run a non-KYC crypto platform especially when no fiat is involved.

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @zuspotirko 22 Mar

They're not meant as wallets - they're meant as a hot / short term balance for using the site.

If someone keeps his life savings on a social media buffer ... It's his own fault

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheBTCManual 22 Mar

Completely agree from a user standpoint, sure apps can have support for connecting to your LNDhub or something like that if you never want to trust anyone.

I think the big thing is either companies rug users or governments can capture company to rug users, but like you say its minimized by not having a large amount of sats on any one service