pull down to refresh

  1. Fear of financial regulators. Fear of having to do this later, when we know it will eventually need to be done. Fear of lightning wallets that support apps and the protocol not being ready when we'll need to depend on them. Fear of non-custodial lightning not maturing because no one wants to put in the effort to try. If anything SN's investors had a small bias again us changing this early. My investors are the good kind - I do what I want and they like it that way.
  2. Your first two questions will not be relevant after Nov. 5th as SN won't have custody of sats before they are sent to you (autowithdrawals were an intermediate solution). To your last question, if the sender and recipient are using attached wallets and 1 sat can be routed between them successfully, yes that is a lightning transaction. If 1 cannot be routed between them, the recipient will receive cowboy credits unless they've indicated (via their settings) they'd rather receive nothing in such cases.
Fear of non-custodial lightning not maturing because no one wants to put in the effort to try.
Fuck yes
reply
I wanted to add, re: investors, for anyone that might be a forum sleuth: startup investors are not as meddlesome as popular media would have you believe. And, even if they were, I own 89% of SN and have not signed away any future voting rights.
reply
:Thumbs up: to question 1.
To question 2, if no route can be found, and a cowboy credit is created instead, where does the sat go?
I will make an educated guess that the sat stays in the zapper's wallet, then the zappee receives +1 CC and the zapper is deduced -1 CC. Is that correct?
reply
The sat is paid to SN, which in turn creates a cowboy credit and assigns it to the receiver.
If the sender has CCs in their wallet, rather than creating a CC, we'll just transfer it to the receiver like sats are transferred today.
reply