As a UX designer by trade and a newcomer to Lightning, I cannot agree more about the UX being a huge barrier for newbies to move towards non-custodial solutions with Lightning. Two big issues come to mind when I think about improving the experience of using Lightning: running your own node and channel payments, which is mentioned in the article.

Most people are used to using apps/services like Cash App, Zelle, Venmo, PayPal, etc. where the UX is fairly simple. Find the person you want to send to (usually by username, phone number, or email), enter the amount you want to send, and hit the button. That's it.

I'd wager no one really knows about the technology that's under the hood that makes it happen (hell, I don't either lol) but it works and they don't question it. The majority of other cryptocurrencies operate in a similar fashion where you enter the address, enter the amount, and hit send. The technology is invisible and isn't really discussed, unless you're actively working on it or you're just super curious about it.

My initial experiences with Lightning were using Cash App's and Exodus's Lightning features, so I always thought Lightning functioned similarly to on-chain BTC and that at least Exodus's Lightning feature was non-custodial. But once I took a deeper dive, I discovered that I was completely wrong.

You're 100% right in that it definitely takes some tech-expertise and some enthusiasm to set up and run your own node. I do have a Raspberry Pi that I like use to tinker with, but I do not have a strong development background.

When I learned that true non-custodial solutions required running your own node, I was already put off a little bit. I understand that there are solutions that should be easy to set up and even run on my Raspberry Pi, but I really do not like the idea of having to make sure I understand how to set up everything properly from the beginning and also how to troubleshoot any issues.

That's a huge part of the reason why I'm using Alby, Cash App, and Strike as ways to partake with the Lightning network.

I tried using Electrum for a bit since that's the OG wallet that everyone seems to love. The UX is obviously not as up to snuff as other wallets, but I didn't have any issues for on-chain BTC payments. However, setting up Lightning was a different story.

If I recall, Electrum had a sort of Lightning node solution you can use (I remember looking up what trampoline meant or something), but I had no idea that you had to "open" a channel first by sending sats and that also dictated the max amount of sats you can send to that specific channel. Definitely lots of confusion/frustration and I ended up just closing everything and moving all my funds out of Electrum lol.

It just didn't make sense from a UX perspective that in order to send a specified number of funds to an address, I had to first open a channel with the same amount. The whole mental model of this still baffles me, and it's hard to justify how this makes sense from a usability perspective without having a deeper understanding of the technical reasons.

There are apps that handle channel creation very well by keeping it under the hood, such as Phoenix so maybe this isn't as large of an issue. Electrum is a wallet for people who have a technical understanding anyways.

Phew, I wrote a lot. Regardless I am excited to see more non-custodial solutions in the future where everyday folks can jump into Lightning with both feet. Having a good UX increases accessibility which in turn creates adoption.