I'm not saying one is necessarily less trustworthy than the other. I'm saying that it is hypocritical to tell people not to use custodial lightning because it might get rugged, and then tell them to use cashu instead. In both cases, they are only as trustworthy as the person(s) who holds the keys to the nodes that hold the bitcoin. Cashu has valid uses, but self-custody is not one of them unless you are the node/mint operator. 

 Crap. I think i deleted my message that you were responding to because i missunderstood your prior statement. 

I think cashu works better for receiving money through a LN Address, even better than self hosting, assuming you are expecting to receive small amounts, e.g. a regular user, as it adds a level of privacy.  

 I agree, the privacy implications are one reason it's so useful. I'm not against cashu. Just pointing out that for most people using it, it is still essentially custodial lightning, albeit with some other benefits like privacy. 

 The problem is that people are going to trust these custodial services no matter what we tell them. So I say do away with the traditional custodial lightning, and move it into cashu. How to get users into self custody is the delimma.