21 sats \ 7 replies \ @ChrisS 13 Sep \ parent \ on: Would a triple maxi scenario scare you a little bit? bitcoin
If you have a significant amount of bitcoin it would be unwise to have it all on a single device at your house. A multisignature setup would be one possible solution.
As far as someone monitoring the blockchain and seeing how much an address of your has when you spend, this is why it’s important to use a different address for each transaction you recieve. And if you do end up with a large utxo are there are ways to break it into a smaller one so that when you spend it it’s much harder for the recipient of your payment to know how much money you have.
reply
reply
reply
That's true, but that would be dumb anyways and kinda deserved then, ain't it?
And yet that’s what the post/comment is about. Not everyone is aware of how to use bitcoin the best possible way. Instead of calling people “paranoid” and calling them “dumb” lead with the lightning part.
reply
Remember that time ledger had the brilliant idea that it'd be cool to wear your hardware wallet as a necklace? I'm sure there would be people who'd wear it.
It's no mystery that the blockchain is public, thus, indirectly showing off your stack by spending from your "vault" wouldn't exactly be the smartest of moves to make, just as running around with a stack of 100-$ bills in a clip isn't exactly the smartest of moves to make.
A bit of common sense goes a long way.
reply
i use lightning where i can and for smaller amounts etc, but is the idea that by moving form chain to lightning and then making a payment, a would-be chain watcher would at least find it a lot harder to identify your remaining stack?
reply
Yes. A payment made on lightning is not visible on chain(although there are other more nuanced privacy concerns). This and proper on chain utxo management will help in the scenario you describe where you want privacy from the recipient of your payment and also helps privacy from 3rd party chain observers.
reply