The link for this post uses a read-only front-end for Twitter, which can be easier to read for viewing a full Twitter thread. The Tweet that kicked off the thread is:
If Minimint is successful getting deployed and adopted that will be a huge win for Bitcoin scalability, making people accept the fact that custodianship isn't bad and can be made even less badder.
Improving custodianship is the road for hyperbitcoinization, not shitting on it.
reply
Improving custodianship is the road for hyperbitcoinization,
Very true. Under a few million sats it is very hard to run a Lightning node and become self sovereign. It's a challenge we have to solve - excluding large parts of the lower class is unacceptable.
reply
True. But my vision of Bitcoin currently is that its a sort of dark money and something ppl have on the side, custodianship does not fit well into this concept since those are attack vectors from the greater power structures. But if they leave BTC more or less alone then custodianship will be involved in most BTC activity and improving it is key :> Its like a garden that grows on top. But if the power structures poison the soil then what
reply
Don't lump in the concept of custodianship like we have with custodial exchanges and custodial wallets (e.g., Wallet Of Satoshi) with the custodianship targets for minimint.
Families or communities may prefer federated mints for a more local and streamlined Bitcoin banking experience, where running your own node or using a fully centralized custodial service is neither available nor wanted.
reply