645 sats \ 2 replies \ @freetx 20 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: John Carvalho and Liquid bitcoin
Yes, its a fair point: What are the alternatives?
As a counterpoint however, you still need to pay a mining fee to peg-in to Liquid....so at that point why not just swap into LN?
A valid reason might be needing to transact in larger amounts (>.5 btc) or you are specifically transacting with Liquid Federation members.....
100% if you're moving into Liquid or LN from on-chain you meet the same on-chain cost so do you go custodial LN (trust 1 custodian/LSP), run your own LN channels (technical overhead, and stay online) or go Liquid which gives you a similar UX as on-chain for those who aren't ready to make the leap to dealing with a new ecosystem with invoices, address formats etc.
I think the use case is to buy L-BTC directly with fiat or stablecoins to build a stack or make payments and you could move to LN with that via a swap service and vice versa
Could even use Liquid as a secondary storage option for sats to rebalance a channel
Who knows? Liquid blocks are still pretty much a ghost town but relatively it has picked so people are clearly discovering it and using it for some reason they didn;t have before
reply
The issue of the LN is inbound liquidity.
reply