Oddbean new post about login | logout Hey smart people #asknostr esp those who’ve read “the book of satoshi” When hal finney and satoshi were discussing “bitcoin banks” they was essentially describing lightning, were they not? Is there nothing to be said for a pressure towards integrity for a potentially custodial system of this nature since it’s an open network? I think there is… i *think*
Banks like Xapo https://www.xapobank.com/en/blog/introducing-universal-money-addresses-at-xapo-bank are adopting this: https://www.uma.me/ by https://www.lightspark.com/
Hmm while that is interesting, i don’t think it’s quite what i meant Maybe i’m just retarded but wallet of satoshi, for example, would be one of the “bitcoin banks” where yes they hold the keys but it needs to be reliable and functional on both Bitcoin and lightning or else people wouldn’t even use it Not like literal banks partnering with “crypto” companies
Xapo is a Bitcoin bank. It was founded by Wences Casares an early Bitcoiner. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wences_Casares I'm not specifically trying to answer your questions, I'm just sharing what I know. Bu UMA is potentially a protocol (Lightning + KYC + USD), that allows banks to benefit from Bitcoin as a money transmission system, similar to @strike approach.
I understood you right. But it doesn't matter if the custodians will be "legacy banks" or "new banks". Both would have to be truthful though.
Yep they were. In fact I think that custodians are the only way to get bitcoin to the masses. But with bitcoin on lightning we can prove that the banks don't fraud us.
Lightning service providers are the new banks. You either connect your node to them (no trusted third party) or you trust a third party LSP. This trusted LSP could be a single entity mint or an app like WoS. It could also be a federation like liquid or Fedi. Lightning is the main payment protocol & method of settlement between LSPs. An LN invoice will be paid. What happens between the normie & the LSP is what's being worked out right now. Multiple approaches to the same problem, with different risks & tradeoffs. Nobody should be forced to accept a token that they don't want. Seller provides a lightning invoice, lightning invoice is paid & the transaction is complete. The user can decide who they place their trust in. Rugs will be pulled.
Ok so that’s my impression as well. I just get confused by the mass bear waves from devs on lightning. I just assume something like lightning but better will come around when that happens 😅 I am not particularly bullish ecash personally
I could be wrong but that's how I view it & see it panning out. I don't see ecash being particularly useful unless your ecash wallet can pay a lightning invoice. People shouldn't need to trust a token/mint just because you have. I really like Aqua wallet's approach in this regard. Custody & exchanging value while minimising 3rd party risk is what's being solved for in my mind. One of the benefits of ecash is not needing to be always connected to the internet to exchange value. This has some niche use cases where Internet access is sporadic or unreliable.