pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 10 replies \ @siggy47 12 Dec \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
You might be right😀 I'm sure you guessed the company. I just heard back from them. They said it is not a liquidity issue, as I knew, but that my peers are asking too high fees. Here is their solution:
Yeah, I'm sure they'll listen to me 😀
lol, are they not deducting the routing fee from what they send you?
So if you put more of your own nodes between them and your recipient node, you can earn routing fees, also called a fee-siphoning attack?
/cc @optimism
reply
So if you put more of your own nodes between them and you, you can earn routing fees, also called a fee-siphoning attack?
Yes. If I had time for this, I would currently be man-in-the-middle siphoning between SN and specific custodial wallets with low ppm but high fixed, simply due to all the ad hominem about horse icons.
reply
But to be fair, only on the route inbound to SN, because SN does deduct the routing fee from the incoming zap amount, and will not forward the payment if it costs too much (receiver ends up with credits instead).
But yeah, it's a good point that when zapping on SN, you don't really see how much you're paying in network fees. You can only tell later when you look into your wallet.
Wallets should have a setting to limit fees, but I think most wallets don't have one, especially if you're zapping via NWC, etc.
simply due to all the ad hominem about horse icons.
also good point, @siggy47 got shamed into revealing his massive cowboy hat 😅
Nice hat you have there, @siggy47, would be a shame if something happened to it!
reply
reply
reply
It doesn't really matter if the zapper or the rewards pool pays for the assmilking. Profit maximalism. With all the gamblers around here, I'm sure they would cheer.
Re: NWC and max fee. Some wallets that I tried indeed don't, I think that cashu did have something for this, and on the SN side it works awesomely.