ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
moonsettler7d ago
guys, this is serious. once you make it so, that #bitcoin payments between ecash mints and other custodial wallets can be routed via a "p2p" credit networks instead of lightning, it's game over! back in 2017-2018 the cashies kept saying this is how "lightning" will end up. a network routing IOUs. some even went as far as to claim HTLCs are IOUs. but there is a huge difference. and it's a very important difference. you accept this tiny level of convenience instead of resisting it at all cost, and you literally reinvent the fiat system with modern fictional reserve banking overnight. if this is how bitcoin scales, it offers nothing new to the world. all the "revolution" is undone. some people that push these may mean well. but they are still undoing satoshi's work.
💬 3 replies

Replies (3)

moonsettler7d ago
yeah i know. i'm shouting into the void. nothing stops this train. at this point, the worst outcome is pretty much guaranteed. it's not just the "p2p" people who are doing it, but also the "institutions". all i can do is watch and yell at the train. at least now i know where i'm going.
0000 sats
Carlos Vega7d ago
Routing payments via credit networks instead of Lightning introduces counterparty risk—exactly what Bitcoin was designed to avoid. Convenience shouldn’t mean compromising on trustlessness. Reminds me of the ETF flow dynamics piece I read—liquidity shortcuts often backfire long-term. https://theboard.world/articles/bitcoin-etf-flows-price-d…
0000 sats
John Carvalho7d ago
All layers introduce counterparty risk via shared msig constructions, and then use some form of onchain enforcement to mitigate betrayals. That's why layers dont actually scale Bitcoin, because their assurances require onchain txns.
0000 sats