pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @TheWildHustle 17 Sep \ parent \ on: Chaumian E-Cash on Bitcoin: Banks in Cyberspace or Regulatory Capture? bitcoin
Ah, you guys dont want to be responsible for holding anyone's corn.
If my e-cash balance is saved on multiple relays, and SN gives me the option to use the NIP 60 wallet. Would it still be considered as SN holding corn?
And I dont mind putting 1k sats in products that I use on a daily basis, if it gives me some sort of value or benefit.
But i guess as SN scales it would be better to move completely away from anything that might be considered custody. Do you think all bitcoin apps should aspire to the same?
write
preview
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 17 Sep
Other businesses should do what suites their customers and risk tolerance. Serving US customers as a custodian requires millions of dollars of licenses and kycing customers.
I don’t think KYC and social should be mixed. And I don’t think KYC is moral, period.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @bitalion 17 Sep
We won't always have self-custodial solutions, simply because it's not feasible in all cases, just like you say you can put 1k in something that might give you benefits. A good wallet should pursue self-custody for the sake of its users; but for example I don't think SN needs something like that, it's enough that it provides more ways to withdraw funds.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheWildHustle 17 Sep
SN can't hold the bitcoin.
So users need to choose between another custodian or sovereign lightning node.
If we're moving completely away from all custodial relationships (regardless of the amount of sats we're trusting them with.) E-cash doesn't make any sense.
If I shouldn't trust an app with 5 sats, why would I use e-cash at all. My node works just fine.
reply