View quoted note →
The Lightning Network cannot scale and never will. This is why everyone is building fake centralized hybrid Lightning bullshit and using custodial apps. There are many reasons for this, here are some.
Liquidity: Each channel requires funding, twice. That capital is frozen until you splice, rebalance, or close. As adoption grows, the liquidity requirement grows quadratically. As on-chain fees grow, cost of using LN goes up while security assurances go down.
Complexity: Complexity breeds centralization. Most users do not tolerate the base LN experience. Most devs do not tolerate depending on complex buggy self-custodial implementations. You've practically got to be an entire Lightning stack business to reliably provide a self-custodial product. Costs rise, leading to severe centralization at scale.
Routing: Portrayed as the coolest part of LN, but truly the worst aspect due to liquidity requirements, uncertainty, complexity. Results in hubs, then centralization at scale.
Breaking changes: Constant new complexity requires node runners to always run new, potentially insecure software. New channel types, new payment protocols, all destroy interoperability.
Obscure Hacks Required: If you want to provide a LN wallet or app you need to learn all the weird solutions, like LNURL, misc patches & tools, that people hacked in because LN protocol devs and LN implementation companies rarely care about the user space (probably because it is hopeless). We get weird derivative things hacked into others, like subscriptions into one specific payment protocol, but not into others; or, three different weird email format nicknames that arent actually emails, and are all implemented in trusted ways. This results in LN businesses and LN devs requiring arcane understanding, and endless patience, in the LN world.
Regulatory trap: Running a LSP business safely requires experienced lawyers for a constantly changing compliance landscape. New hybrid LN services like Spark, Liquid swaps, and taproot-asset edge nodes, will draw regulatory scrutiny the moment something goes wrong, or becomes too large.
Lightning is somewhat cool and useful, but it doesn't actually fix Bitcoin payments at scale, so much as kinda-sorta provide efficiencies as long as you don't actually scale too much...
TLDR?
The concept of a high-frequency bitcoin channel is sound, and proven now.
The concept of a bitcoin-based routing network as an efficiency has not been proven, and, arguably, has failed.
And ultimately, what matters most is the final nail in the coffin:

The Lightning Network cannot scale and never will. This is why everyone is building fake centralized hybrid Lightning bullshit and using custodial apps. There are many reasons for this, here are some.
Liquidity: Each channel requires funding, twice. That capital is frozen until you splice, rebalance, or close. As adoption grows, the liquidity requirement grows quadratically. As on-chain fees grow, cost of using LN goes up while security assurances go down.
Complexity: Complexity breeds centralization. Most users do not tolerate the base LN experience. Most devs do not tolerate depending on complex buggy self-custodial implementations. You've practically got to be an entire Lightning stack business to reliably provide a self-custodial product. Costs rise, leading to severe centralization at scale.
Routing: Portrayed as the coolest part of LN, but truly the worst aspect due to liquidity requirements, uncertainty, complexity. Results in hubs, then centralization at scale.
Breaking changes: Constant new complexity requires node runners to always run new, potentially insecure software. New channel types, new payment protocols, all destroy interoperability.
Obscure Hacks Required: If you want to provide a LN wallet or app you need to learn all the weird solutions, like LNURL, misc patches & tools, that people hacked in because LN protocol devs and LN implementation companies rarely care about the user space (probably because it is hopeless). We get weird derivative things hacked into others, like subscriptions into one specific payment protocol, but not into others; or, three different weird email format nicknames that arent actually emails, and are all implemented in trusted ways. This results in LN businesses and LN devs requiring arcane understanding, and endless patience, in the LN world.
Regulatory trap: Running a LSP business safely requires experienced lawyers for a constantly changing compliance landscape. New hybrid LN services like Spark, Liquid swaps, and taproot-asset edge nodes, will draw regulatory scrutiny the moment something goes wrong, or becomes too large.
Lightning is somewhat cool and useful, but it doesn't actually fix Bitcoin payments at scale, so much as kinda-sorta provide efficiencies as long as you don't actually scale too much...
TLDR?
The concept of a high-frequency bitcoin channel is sound, and proven now.
The concept of a bitcoin-based routing network as an efficiency has not been proven, and, arguably, has failed.
And ultimately, what matters most is the final nail in the coffin:

An unfortunate consequence of the popular crypto press' habitual oversimplification of #Monero as a "privacy coin" is that people tend to over-emphasize privacy and underappreciate fungibility.
Fungibility is why the privacy happens. However, privacy is only a subset of what fungibility provides. There are benefits of fungibility for those people out there who have zero concern for privacy.
Thanks to the efforts of blockchain surveillance organizations, every address and every transaction of every transparent ledger now automatically include a social credit score as part of their permanent metadata baggage. You can't opt out of that. So, the actions of the people who owned a transparent coin before you owned it and also after you owned it, can and will transfer to your reputation. It doesn't matter if you care about privacy or not -this is something that nobody with an honorable reputation will knowingly tolerate.
It isn't really the ethos of the Monero community to tell other people what to do with their money, thus you do you.
I will observe, though, that the asset diversification that Markowitz found to be a Schelling point back in 1952, would not necessarily have to be be accomplished within crypto, if one came to their own conclusion that the sufficiently high quality assets within crypto needed to diversify within crypto, simply do not exist. In this case the use of XMR as an exclusive representative asset of all crypto would be balanced at the overall portfolio level via prudent allocation to other asset classes.




How Liberalism Becomes Oligarchy and Why Monero Matters More Than Zcash™
Liberalism never truly freed us – it only made us more efficiently governable. Its promise of freedom was never universal, but selective: the freedom of property has always meant the freedom to wield power over others. From this liberal dream, oligarchy inevitably arose – the enduring form in which power and wealth are concentrated in the same hands. Historically, this oligarchy wore two masks. In England and America, it appeared as a private-enterprise religion: the Calvinist spirit blessed the successful, and the market became the judge of morality. In Prussia and France, it was bureaucratic: rule by officials and experts who managed the populace with forms and seals. These systems – the cult of the pseudo-entrepreneur and the bureaucratic state – were never true opposites, but two expressions of the same principle: rule through property, control through systems. Today, they have merged – in technofeudalism. The state builds the legal infrastructure, subsidizes, regulates, and monitors. Corporations feed it with taxes, data, and lobbying, while figures like Bill Gates, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel deploy their companies and projects to directly shape government functions. Market and state are no longer opposites – they are organs of a single body: the oligarchic megamachine. Tech billionaires are the new monarchs of this algorithmic aristocracy, envisioning a state as software they fully control: an operating system of compliant users. This new class understands that transparency (just like in Bitcoin) is necessary for control – but asymmetrically. They remain shielded behind trusts and offshore structures, while for the masses, financial sovereignty is a privilege that must be justified.
That’s why Zcash is not a tool of liberation, but a Trojan horse. Its "optional anonymity" is the perfect model for technofeudal capitalism: the elite use privacy freely – CEOs, intelligence agencies, government networks, investment funds. They shield their wealth without accountability. The foot soldiers – workers, activists, dissidents – are suspected with every shielded transaction. Anonymity becomes an exception that must be explained. Maybe not for buying a coffee, but funds large enough to finance projects in parallel economies pose a real threat to the technofeudal order and must be tightly controlled.
Monero, by contrast, is the opposite. It doesn’t shield optionally – it shields fundamentally. No hierarchy of the visible and invisible. No double standard where rulers keep accounts secret while the populace cannot evade regulations. It is the digital equivalent of an anonymous gathering in the forest: egalitarianism through opacity. The new oligarchy hates this. Their power depends on visibility – but only of others. The masses are meant to expose themselves, measure themselves, optimize themselves – until they perfectly match the machine. This "self-optimization" is not progress, it is conditioned obedience – the prelude to the transhuman turn.
For the tech elite, domination is not enough. They want to redesign what it means to be human. When labor and consumption are no longer needed, when machines outperform us, humans become errors to be corrected. Transhumanism is the final form of liberal oligarchy: total control, extended into flesh and code. Yet we still have a way out – in the shadows, in encryption, off-grid. Our home is not the regulated market, but the agora of free individuals in black markets. Perhaps history will begin again where the light of surveillance ends – not as the progress of machines, but as the return of humans.

"Yeterli seviyede gizlilik" hiç mahremiyet olmaması ile aynı şeydir. Mutlak mahremiyet, tıpkı Cypherpunk ataların da dediği gibi bir doğal hak öncülüdür ki sadece #Monero bunun için mücadele etmektedir ve önemli olan da bunu ilk kimin yaptığı değil, kimin en iyi yaptığıdır.
Dünya giderek daha baskıcı teknokratik bir hâl alıyor, ancak her zaman özgürlüğüne ve gizliliğine hayati önem atfedip öncelik veren insanlar olacaktır. Ana akım hizmetlerde, yani merkezî borsalarda listelenmeyecek olsa bile biz Monero'yu bileceğiz, göreceğiz, kullanmaya devam edeceğiz. Çünkü Monero daima asıl işe yarayan, insanlığa şimdi ve daima asıl faydası dokunan olarak kalmaya ve teknolojinin desentralizasyonist doğasıyla el ele yükselmeye devam edecek. Monero'nun değeri artmaya ve değeri anlaşılmaya devam edecek. Bitcoin'in başlatmaya yeltenip bıraktığı yerden Monero alıp daha sert adımlarla devam ediyor, işi de kesinlikle bitirecek ve siz gizli fiat heveslilerinin bu konuda yapabileceğiniz hiçbir şey, sürdürebileceğiniz hiçbir negatif etkiniz olamayacak. Çünkü Monero, üstüne saldıran tüm kötü aktörleri, yani ASIC sistemler, FBI, IRS, Interpol, Europol, BIS, EU, Çin, Birleşik Krallık, Ciphertrace, Chainalysis, Elliptic, Integra, BlackRock ve benzerlerini rahatlıkla püskürtüp tüm merkezî borsaların %99'undan atıldıktan sonra bile piyasa değerini ve pazar payını %300 arttırdı ve müstakbel FCMP++ iyileştirmesiyle de tüm kullanıcılarına hem geçmiş hem de geleceğe dönük mutlak koruma ve hızlı işlevsellik sağlama kabiliyetini artırmayı sürdürerek gerçek Cypherpunk ve Kripto-anarşist idealleri yerine getiren yegâne eşler arası elektronik nakit para sistemi olduğunu kanıtlamaya devam ediyor olacak.
Temel mahremiyetini geçici bir dijital konfor için feda edenler, ne mahremiyeti ne de konforu hak eder.