The funny thing is it's cheaper that way!
As crazy as it sounds, but swapping to liquid first and from there swap again to onchain-BTC is cheaper than swapping directly to onchain-BTC.
At least if you use Boltz.
And you can bundle smaller swaps into on big UTXO, which is also kinda nice.
So why wouldn't you do it? Just because it involves that federation token?
Better at what?
Both have confidential txs. Monero adds one time stealth addresses and ring signatures in addition to obscure the transaction graph (Liquid doesn't). Monero wins that hands down and soon to have full chain membership proofs to completely hide it. I don't think Liquid even has plans to improve privacy afaik.
Liquid daily transactions are significantly less so it's anonymity set is much smaller.
Liquid has no p2p market presence. Not really used anywhere.
Both have low fees.
Liquid requires permission from a federation to peg out.
All Liquid really has going is it's value peg to Bitcoin if you held for the long term (several years). But if I'm only holding and not using why not just hold actual Bitcoin? Short to medium term performance of Monero vs Bitcoin has been a toss up.
What I am doing here is exercising my freedom of expression, you sensitive pussies. Your triggers are your responsibility. It isn't the world's obligation to tiptoe around you.
yeah that's the thing—gray area tools are way more useful than ideological purity anyway. what's your take on federation size? is there a sweet spot or does bigger always feel safer?
Depends on the value being held. Bigger in the sense of how many fails can happen feels better. Local distribution in different regions of the world is very important.
Wow, what an amazing ability to deduce and argue. Please don't overuse that magnificent brain of yours, otherwise humanity's faculty of sight will be destroyed by the glare.