1. Why only BOLT12 and not LNURL/LN Address?
  2. Why LDK as backend?
  3. Why is displayed USD on the main wallet screen and not BTC? We are talking about a Bitcoin wallet not fiat wallet, right?
  4. What is doing the "Fund" button on the main screen? Open LN channels or buying sats from an exchange?
  5. The 0.5% fee/payment is only for sending or also for receiving? Is an interesting model to keep online a node and charge a fee per tx, without need to take care of liquidity. But what about privacy? How do I know that the liquidity you provide is not actually tracking all my txs?
  6. Is Lexe another FBI stunt move like FBIbook?
  1. We do intend on supporting a subset of the LNURL protocols - our current priority is launching our product. It's been a while since I read over the specs, but last I looked there were only a handful of protocols that met our security requirements - we don't want Lexe to accidentally become a 3rd party that can steal payments, for example.
  2. LDK was the obvious choice for us because it's the only implementation where the Lightning logic is fully separated out from I/O. This is a hard requirement for running in SGX, where you don't have access to things like disk / network / syscalls. We're very grateful for LDK and the Spiral team.
  3. Users can toggle between USD/BTC/sats display :)
  4. The fund button is for if we eventually want to add an exchange integration in the future. We'll probably end up removing it, the screenshot on the website is a preview of our very much WIP mobile app.
  5. Good catch - yes, the 0.5% fee is both for sending and receiving. We thought that this business model was the most fair because users don't have to keep paying for a node that they don't actually use (which sometimes happens in a subscription model). To make this possible, however, Lexe has to be the only LSP. So we'd see the amount and directionality of payments, and know your channel balance (not your on-chain wallet balance), but we don't know (1) who you're sending to or (2) who you received from.
reply