Remember all the people who reposted or liked this note because they are clowns who support KYC and censorship.
calle's avatar calle
I heard you like ecash, so we used ecash to secure ecash mints. Blind authentication will allow mint operators to restrict the use of their mint to only registered users, while still providing them great privacy. This is one of the most-requested features for Cashu. image The spec is now open for discussion: https://github.com/cashubtc/nuts/pull/198
View quoted note →

Replies (27)

cashu is a custodial bank. Money can be held hostage and KYC asked retroactively. Implementation details don't matter it's a fact. People are delusional about bitcoin banks
I think this spec will be a mistake. TBH, I am confident once the flaws are pointed out, the spec will be withdrawn. OpenID is just centralised identity. We might be better of exploring DID specs around decentralised identity - Harder to build, but lets not talk to OpenID providers!
literally a feature that multiple Bitcoin community projects and businesses have requested that want to transition from normal custodian to ecash. we're winning, these are just the inevitable screeching noises by NPCs in the background. the more these people screech, the more I know we're doing it right.
The real NPCs are those who lack the competence to build self-custodial projects. I focus on better things and refuse to introduce KYC to benefit corporations. You are an attacker and will be called out.
x's avatar
x 1 year ago
When is WoS adopting cashu?
You that is not realistic right? People are going to keep using custodians, so we should use the best available technology for that (ecash)
x's avatar
x 1 year ago
It's a bit different. Taler identifies merchants.
They are just trying to build something that could realistically work in the world we live in on a larger scale. Some centralization still has a place and a purpose. To me, it also depends on WHO you are trusting to be the centralizing entity. And what choices and say you have in that process. Seems like when you get into the weeds of it and really dig into functionality, (which I have not and am not technically capable, but i’m goad there are those of you that do/can!) these mints are our only real solution right now. I like the effort and dedication that these people are putting into finding real world solutions for the industry instead of the normal “legacy” solutions. Bitcoin can’t scale itself as is. I just think you’re pointing your barrel at the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
Mints are legacy solutions. They are no different than banks taking gold and printing paper notes in 1600s. Even the privacy is exactly the same, cashu also has bank note denominations. How did banks end up?
Yea but i thought with this, like fedi, you can choose the mint right? You can mint for your own family only, or Jeff down the street can create a mint for the town or neighborhood, or you can make one for your gaming club and everybody just pays each with cashu. It all just depends on who you trust. (That includes trusting yourself to be your OWN bank in the bitcoin world right?). And you trust and know Jeff or yourself, but not big bankers who come into your town. It just makes it easier to “create your own” bank instead of relying on “The Bank” 🏦 or other centralized unknown entities. People can make their own money and rely on each other INSTEAD of those legacy solutions. But also i’m just an observer of people trying to make and build extraordinary things and solutions and can’t really do it myself or fully understand. Just trying to make sense of it all haha
There is an advantage to scale. Big mints are much better. That's why everyone uses WoS it's so efficient. There will equivalent of WoS size mint that will end badly. Small mints end up no better than just paying by lightning directly. Maybe like if you have a family you have one channel instead of five but at that point ecash might be disadvantage because of eg recovery after loss it might be better to be fully open and trusted