3 ms·
“If it works” is kind of important to determine, though. From what I’ve seen, LN frequently doesn’t work and transactions fail for unknown reasons (offline node
by freeAgent 5y ago
“If it works” is kind of important to determine, though. From what I’ve seen, LN frequently doesn’t work and transactions fail for unknown reasons (offline nodes, no route, liquidity issues, inability to open new channels with peers, etc.). The “solution” to LN’s problems right now appears to be custodial, centralized wallet providers, but that defeats the purpose of using Bitcoin. For example, Twitter is using Strike for tipping, but that wallet is custodial and requires KYC to use. That’s not aligned with what Bitcoin is supposed to be, IMO.
- lottin 5y agoThis is because "peer-to-peer digital cash" is incompatible with features that consumers definitely want, such as, reversibility, legal protection and customer support.
- _red 5y agoWell, the nuance is not every consumer desires every transaction to have those things. Trying to make blanket statements leads to incorrect conclusions...there are a myriad of cases where consumers prefer classes of transactions to be digital-cash like.
- thefounder 5y ago>> such as, reversibility, legal protection and customer support. Most crypto holders just want digital cash...not another paypal. We already have paypal. I don't want "customer support" when I put my cash down...neither reversibility or "legal protection(whatever that means). There are legal agreements that can be set for different types of transaction but I definitely don't want paypal, visa or some random bank to decide whether it likes my transaction or not or put it on hold for "my own protection".
- anonymoushn 5y agoMy impression is that Strike is not providing these features, it's just inserting a central hub in the LN path used by its users.