reply on: [meta] Is fedimint too niche of a territory? \ stacker news ~ecash

pull down to refresh

1006 sats \ 8 replies \ @Rsync25 6 Feb \ on: [meta] Is fedimint too niche of a territory? ecash

I support create territory for Cashu and Ecash

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @TonyGiorgio OP 6 Feb

As separate or all under one called ecash?

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @Rsync25 6 Feb

Or unique with ecash or only cashu

513 sats \ 5 replies \ @TonyGiorgio OP 6 Feb

I'm not buying 3 territories so you're on your own there

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Rsync25 6 Feb

Solution: Create one territory for Cashu.

As Fedimint and Cashu are separated protocol. Well done!

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @TonyGiorgio OP 6 Feb

I don't care enough about cashu that much where I would create a territory for it. Other people are welcome to and I would be interested in seeing the posts.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @aoeu 6 Feb

Too bad eCash on Fedimints and Cashu are not fungible. Then you'd be able to decide what trust model you want to take with your Layer 3 bitcoin. Interoperability between Fedi and Cashu would be awesome.

42 sats \ 1 reply \ @TonyGiorgio OP 6 Feb

Ecash on each fedimint or ecash on each cashu is not fungible either. Lightning is the interoperability.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @supertestnet 7 Feb

on the other hand, the fact that they all support lightning deposits and withdrawals is probably close enough to fungibility

you can take your ecash out of a fedimint via lightning and deposit directly into a cashu mint in the same transaction

it's "technically" not the same as fungibility but at this stage it sure feels like it

reply on another page