reply on: Sill bullish on eCash? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

34 sats \ 0 replies \ @rtr 28 Apr \ parent \ on: Sill bullish on eCash? bitcoin

This is only true if mints do not require KYC. Once mints are forced to act like the other custodians, they will also require KYC.

How hard would it be to just go to a different mint that doesn't require KYC? As far as I understand it, a fedimint can move liquidity between different mints using Lightning.

I just wonder who is going to actually operate these (fedi) mints in practice.

Basing from the fedimint pitch, they intend the tech to be used in small to medium size communities. Ideally, groups where users are large enough that they have sizable liquidity when pooled but small enough that rugpulling will have severe social consequences.

https://sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/losaec1ain/contrib/share/ext/2024.4.28..00.40.58-fm-spectrum-custody.excalidraw-4db14732495b99429517511026155dfa.png

Image source: Fedimint.org

Each mint has its own eCash token that is only redeemable at that particular mint. So for a mint's token to be useful in commerce, it needs to be very popular.

I think the intent of Fedimint is to make it so that every mint is interoperable between each other. There's no "Alice's Sats" and "Bob's Sats." Mutiny Wallet does it already with its fedimint implementation, you can join a federation and send "eSats" to users from other federations and even use that for non-Fedimint Lightning payments.