Oddbean new post about login | logout This is just so rich for someone saying to use a network with notoriously terrible receiver privacy, amount privacy that isn't guaranteed by larger nodes, and IP that is exposed by default to others on the network But none of the above really matters if the vast majority of lightning users are on on custodial wallets that see everything https://zapalytics.com/
nostr:nprofile1qqszrqlfgavys8g0zf8mmy79dn92ghn723wwawx49py0nqjn7jtmjagpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchszyrhwden5te0dehhxarj9ekk7mf0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uynmh4h It's important to be completely factual, and factually complete. Factually complete is harder than being completely factual.
To be more charitable I do like lightnings ephemeral nature @Super Testnet and think that aspect of lightning is great
Lightning doesn't have terrible receiver privacy despite false claims to the contrary. Bolt11 "invoices" had terrible privacy by default, but you could (1) manually wrap them (2) manually replace your key with an ephemeral one (3) use keysend instead. Keysend payments never exposed the recipient, but they also didn't give the sender a "proof of payment." Now we have bolt12 as an arising standard that *also* doesn't expose the recipient by default, and *does* give the sender a proof of payment. Also: the recipient's ip address is not exposed by default. You have to manually configure your network to do port forwarding if you want to show up as a routing node, and that is a big reason why most lightning users do not route payments. And most users who *do* route payments opt to do it over tor so that they *don't* expose their ip address.
Ah I get it now For those who want the TLDR of your reply: https://image.nostr.build/9a93e3cf766e56bb4cede32215a75f002206cff783b1864e238b841a72a3c0b6.png
