This is a very fiat mindset. Bitcoin is a new paradigm.
There's no way to make your sats work for you without giving up your keys, and the moment you do they're not your coins anymore. Therefore, all such solutions are unsafe.
Why be unsafe when your sats naturally appreciate in value over time?
this territory is moderated
There's no way to make your sats work for you without giving up your keys
Not to be that guy, but technically, providing liquidity to the LN is a way of putting your sats to good use, while keeping control over your keys. But it's not something easy to pull off profitably. So all in all, I agree with the spirit of your message.
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 25 Feb
I think you skip a key point, while you may keep those keys you have to make them hot and there are other LN risks too. So putting them on the lightning network is not a zero risk move. It might be relatively low risk, especially if you're not a routing node, but you still have some nonzero and unpredictable risk. Even if its just losing sats to forced channel closes. So I see where you are trying to go but I strongly disagree. People saying lightning liquidity is risk free has led to an enormous amount of disillusionment and heartache around lightning. We need to be clear about risks and tradeoffs. Ask some LN veterans who ran self hosted nodes in 2018-2020 or during any high fee environment if you're skeptical.
reply
Oh i fully agree with you. It's a hot wallet, it's high-risk, especially in a high-fee environment, and very stressful. I speak of experience. I was just being unjustly pedantic on the technicality of having to give up your keys to make your SATs work.
reply