reply on: Is There A Way To Prove Mints Aren't Inflating Supply? \ stacker news ~ecash

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @kevin 22 Jan freebie \ parent \ on: Is There A Way To Prove Mints Aren't Inflating Supply? ecash

Mercurylayer gives you full custody at all times, no need to prove anything :)

Read more here: https://mercurylayer.com

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @_b_o_n_e_s_ 22 Jan

haha... saw that page when release was announced here. I need the ELI5 version though 🙃 I get the general idea that ownership of private keys is passed around.

so does/can/will mercury function in similar way to these ecash mints?

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @kevin 22 Jan

Yes, there's nothing stopping it technologically from functioning in a similar way. Someone has to build it of course, but it shouldn't be much harder than building something for an ecash mint. It's kind of the same principle.

A Fedimint can act as a lightning gateway to the outside world letting you receive/send ecash.

Similarly a mercurylayer statechain provider can do the same. Act as a LN gateway and give you statechain "UTXOs".

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @_b_o_n_e_s_ 23 Jan

right. right. that sounds really good. and sorry to be annoying but just to take back to the top and tie it out for me, what you're saying is: there can be cryptographic proof of the IOUs in a statechain, but not fedimint?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kevin 23 Jan

Yeah - in addition to that there’s also the fact that if a Fedimint goes down you are truly fucked, in a mercurylayer you can still go back to the base chain since you have a transaction you can broadcast :)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @_b_o_n_e_s_ 23 Jan

thank you sir ✌ makes a tonne of sense. appreciate the insight and look forward to seeing more statechain stuff being built out then