28 sats \ 1 reply \ @sethforprivacy OP 31 May \ parent \ on: Summarizing my thoughts on ecash bitcoin
Yeah, it's literally an IOU for dollars.
As I said, I think it's disingenuous to pretend that ecash is not custodial, as the asset people care about is Bitcoin, not the IOU on top of it. No one would accept ecash that wasn't fully redeemable for Bitcoin as then it's literally a worthless credential. That is far different than altcoins which have their own incentive structures and are far more resilient than ecash.
I don't necessarily think it's a useless idea, but that it's useless to pursue for Bitcoin payments because of the broken incentives etc. that I mentioned. All previous ecash attempts have failed because they undermine the state and are trivial to shut down, and the latest take on ecash is no different (except that it's backed by an asset that is under intense scrutiny from the US gov). The reason I push so hard against it is because it's inevitable that this either ends in users rugged and trust broken, killing ecash as an idea, or gov rugs and trust broken, killing ecash as an idea.
To me it's a concept that is technically fascinating and I want to love, but one that clearly has no future in the world we live in today. Once we overthrow our oppressors and have more just laws it's another story, and community banking via ecash would probably be a good tool in that potential future.
There is a distinction to be made between the resilience of a system that is just starting out and one that has been around for a while. Be it tether, monero or bitcoin, all were trivial to shut down in their infancy. They are much less so now. It's an interesting thought how trivial it would be for a gov to shut down tether. Certainly worlds easier than btc and xmr, but also probably not trivial.
I'm still quite confused why anyone would trade sats for ecash if what they wanted in the end was the same sats. Why make such a trade in the first place?
For me, I expect to get something for such a trade, and I expect to pay a price. Perhaps the ability to do certain kinds of transactions I can't currently do with btc.
Some folks say ecash's only benefit is privacy. I see more than that: LN still has difficulty delivering on a internet of micropayments. Ecash solves some of these problems (offline receive, need to run a LN node). For example, websites like SN might be able to navigate the trade offs between usability and regulation if they use ecash instead of custody.
We both agree that in the beautiful future all these things might work or at least we will be able to reason about them more clearly. In the unpleasant regulatory mess we currently inhabit, especially in the US, I still wonder if ecash as an altcoin has more usefulness than ecash as custodial bitcoin.
reply