1 sat \ 4 replies \ @sethforprivacy OP 31 May \ parent \ on: Summarizing my thoughts on ecash bitcoin
No one pays me to write these things.
This isn't an attack on Cashu, but a summary of my issues with ecash generally (that includes fedimints etc.).
Yes, don't use them :)
Covenants would make Lightning for more user-friendly and enable better L2s, so that would be an ideal starting place.
Not using custodial solutions is not a solution!
Sometimes it makes sense. Why you only see the negative aspect of custodial solutions? Iam willing to loose some sats i use for my daily spendings if i get more privacy and functionality.
With ecash you can literally print your own money (iou) and give it offline to somebody else. You can do it even physically by handing over a banknote.
You can even be in the desert without internet access or electronic device.
Covenants is another solution that does not exist yet. It also is a L2 solution.
Cashu does exist today and i would say it is a L3 solution and an improvement of custodial services that are being used since many years.
reply
Can't you also do that with LNURL-w?
reply
No, this is not the same.
LNURL is a HTTP request. Sure you can print a lnurl-w voucher on paper. But you still have the problem that the custodial sees everything and can even delete this specific request.
With ecash this is not possible. You can not destroy a specific token.
Iam not a lnurl professional, only using it sometimes so i can not explain the difference very well but i think others here can explain the difference.
If nobody answers open a neutral topic: The difference between Lnurl-w and ecash.