pull down to refresh
113 sats \ 0 replies \ @P2P_bitcoin 20 Jun 2022
To clarify on the name "SBW": Standard Sats SBW is a fork of Simple Bitcoin Wallet, SBW:
https://sbw.app
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @KingZing 21 Jun 2022
Does this mean the channel will auto manage the sats to keep the same fiat value?
How long can this keep going for? And how can they do this if bitcoin drops 25% in a day or so?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @notgeld OP 21 Jun 2022
Yes. If bitcoin drops the channel needs more sats to construct valid payment when user spends.
Until channel closes or user withdraws all funds.
We do this in according to protocol. Host overrides channel state and client accepts it since it increases sats balance on his side. Then the client can send payments up to channel capacity (in asset values). If price increases, then there is enough sats to make payments and there is only asset price in channel states that has to be adjusted.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @nout 21 Jun 2022
I'm testing it and it seems to work :)
It does the exchanging live on Kollider non-KYC LN exchange from what I can tell...
It would be much better if the UI would actually show on the homepage that there is fiat channel and highlight more the fiat value. Also - why not have both fiat channel and Bitcoin channel? The UX could then be updated to show 2 balance boxes next to each other - your Bitcoin balance and your fiat balance.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @notgeld OP 21 Jun 2022
You can open real channel with your node or one of the available LSP. But yes, UI is not ideal, sorry.
reply
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @nout 21 Jun 2022
Oh I don't mean it as a complaint - no need to apologize. I'm always trying to give hopefully a constructive feedback with ideas.
In this case I was thinking that having two hosted channels at the same time could help with a really smooth UX, but yes - that would require updating the UI to accommodate it (mainly separate clearly the fiat and bitcoin balances).
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @om 20 Jun 2022
I am disappointed that such a thing exists.
This contraption requires trust that the custodian does exchange sats for stablecoins and trust in the said stablecoin. But most likely the custodian would just go the way of Celsius/3AC/whatever and suddenly "activate HODL mode" for you due to "unusual liquidity pressures".
If you have more than 300 ksat (~$60) in a custodial wallet you'd be better off sending it to an easy non-custodial wallet such as Phoenix. If you have less than $60 just keep it in sats and don't worry too much if it dumps.
reply
31 sats \ 5 replies \ @super_testnet 20 Jun 2022 freebie
This is true for any stablecoin or bank account or even cash. They all require trust. Some people trust the custodian more than they trust bitcoin to be stable. Those people are the target audience for this app.
If you do, you are exposed to bitcoin's volatility. Avoiding volatility is the whole reason anyone might use a fiat channel, so "use a normal bitcoin channel" is not a realistic solution.
Not a realistic solution for someone whose monthly income is $20. They can't afford to have it dump so their only option is to trust someone to keep their value as stable as possible. Fiat channels are a realistic solution as long as you trust the custodian.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @om 21 Jun 2022
There're completely different levels of trust involved in cash and in this kollider thing that is not even released yet plus the extra custodian on top. This is not a match at all.
That's a massive assumption. Realistically right now people seem to use USDC and USDT on Tron or elsewhere. Of course the blockchains don't have quite the speed of LN but then if you need to go to the exchange every time you pay then you don't have LN speed anyway. So people should just continue to use USD* on cheap chains until Taro gets implemented.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @notgeld OP 21 Jun 2022
It was selected due to several reasons:
- allow people to deploy their own nodes with hedging (no-KYC, API enabled, LN exchange)
- suitable contracts. Anyone who wants to run Fiat Channels for themselves could enjoy higher capital efficiency and approximately zero funding fees
You probably do not know that transactions on TRON may be failed or reverted.
Also why Taro is better than native synthetic asset already available.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @om 21 Jun 2022
Sure, also USDC can freeze addresses by government request. But few people care.
The key word here is "synthetic", in other words, this asset is an algorithmic stablecoin less battle tested than Terra. The problem is you can't synthesize more value than the underlying asset (bitcoin) has. For example, suppose people send 10M$ worth of BTC into Kollider and mint synthetic $ with it, but then BTC goes down 10x. Is there 10M$ value still in the $ tokens? Of course not. This is when you activate HODL mode for everybody.
Taro will allow normal non-synthetic tokens like USDC and USDT to circulate on LN. That is the way.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @notgeld OP 21 Jun 2022
There is enough depth in perpetuals, not only on Kollider. And of course, users shouldn't use fiat-denominated liquidity for store their wealth there.
And Fiat Channels may work with bearer stables as well.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @notgeld OP 21 Jun 2022
Thank you.
I could only add that a honest custodian also provides service here: user needs only 1:1 capital to get fiat price exposure. There is no need in collateral thus this solution is more capital efficient.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @yashwanth 21 Jun 2022 freebie
What is average rate vs server rate ? Can you explain how app works in simple terms ?