Default avatar
woolcycle 1 year ago
An alternative take would be that this situation exemplifies the lack of non-custodial LN wallets which are user friendly enough for mass adoption, as if such things existed you would be recommending these to your community instead of the likes of ZBD. Question: if non-custodial LN wallets suitable for mass adoption are still not available, will they ever be? If not, is it perhaps time to explore alternative solutions for user-friendly self custodial micropayment solutions?

Replies (3)

I'm aware about integration with other L1s just through bridges (what I consider very vulnerable as an attack vector). What is your idea about it? is there any specific L1 that could solve the problem without another synthetic btc token? It is a legit question. I really don't know.
I've read the whitepaper, and I'm not convinced. They're working on UX because they have funding from a foundation and are issuing a token. Of course, it's easier to do anything when you're a company that can hire people because you did a premine. Another point is using the browser as a node. I'm pretty skeptical about this, and we have a bunch of examples like IPFS that show it won't work at scale for verification, at least not today. Maybe in the future, but not now. Suggesting Bitcoin needs a middleman is a lie and unethical. People can choose to use a middleman, but they can also run everything themselves. And the tech is evolving to improve usability, like Phoenix, Zeus, Mutiny, etc. Soon we'll even have a Bitcoin Core mobile app. Their integration with Bitcoin is just an app doing swaps. They don't work with the native BTC token either. So, I really think they're just another project trying to gain traction in the market by misleading people about a problem that is not real.