My explanation would be “shit happens” especially with a battle against Satanic banks and millionaires. I’d then suggest if they want better security to support tech that promotes custodial wallets with key revocation. We are not there yet.
The fact is, whether you like it or not, that BlueWallet's Lndhub is shutting down, no matter the reason. Our main weapon against satanic banks and governments are technologies and a mindset that puts self-sovereignty front and center. That requires individual responsibility and is oftentimes the opposite of "quick and easy". Custodial wallets are easy targets for governments, and we cannot win this battle by becoming an easy target for the opponent and turning newcomers into cannon fodder for the enemy.
Now, to be fair, I think both of us have valid points. For instance, the road to adoption of the internet was also messy, there were scams, dotcom bubble, etc., but internet was adopted nonetheless. But we shouldn't lead people new to bitcoin down the wrong path without making the dangers and the drawbacks very clear, telling them that custodial wallets are intended only for very small balances, etc.
reply
Yeah I have lived long enough to understand facts and the web to know what drives tech is actually adoption…not security or even good design. Sats are really just a money tipping mechanism for pgp keys which have been around for a long time except nobody adopted pgp in great numbers. You know why? They were a little inconvenient to use. Nobody is going to run their own node in an average user base. It’s too much trouble.
reply