103 sats \ 11 replies \ @k00b 17 Sep \ parent \ on: Chaumian E-Cash on Bitcoin: Banks in Cyberspace or Regulatory Capture? bitcoin
It doesn't solve regulatory problems. It merely obfuscates them. Someone has to custody the bitcoin and we can't.
Ecash makes usage of these "banks" private. It doesn't solve custodial regulations.
Hey Koob,
Should the SN wallet be a cashu wallet with NWC?
I know you've put a huge amount of time and thought into the wallet, and I'm half retarded so you'll need to excuse some of my ignorance.
Shouldn't all these bitcoin apps with wallets just be e-cash wallets. Especially with that unified nostr wallet thing. Wouldn't it be a step in the right direction as far as interoperability, privacy and security tradeoffs.
Speak some sense into me koob. I'm sure I'm missing something, just not sure what it is. Probably me being to trusting or misunderstanding some aspect of the tech.
reply
Who holds the bitcoin, wildhustle? That’s the problem that Cashu doesn’t magically solve. Someone has to hold the bitcoin and we can’t.
We can build an ecash note storage system into SN (it’d be another kind of attached wallet), and we plan to add it as an option, but stackers would have to choose and trust a Cashu custodian.
reply
Should you guys just remove the wallet entirely and use NWC? Sucks for new users but at least they aren't trusting a custodian with their corn.
Apologies Koob, feels like I'm being slightly difficult. Hectic morning.
reply
Ah, you guys dont want to be responsible for holding anyone's corn.
If my e-cash balance is saved on multiple relays, and SN gives me the option to use the NIP 60 wallet. Would it still be considered as SN holding corn?
And I dont mind putting 1k sats in products that I use on a daily basis, if it gives me some sort of value or benefit.
But i guess as SN scales it would be better to move completely away from anything that might be considered custody. Do you think all bitcoin apps should aspire to the same?
reply
reply
We won't always have self-custodial solutions, simply because it's not feasible in all cases, just like you say you can put 1k in something that might give you benefits. A good wallet should pursue self-custody for the sake of its users; but for example I don't think SN needs something like that, it's enough that it provides more ways to withdraw funds.
reply
SN can't hold the bitcoin.
So users need to choose between another custodian or sovereign lightning node.
If we're moving completely away from all custodial relationships (regardless of the amount of sats we're trusting them with.) E-cash doesn't make any sense.
If I shouldn't trust an app with 5 sats, why would I use e-cash at all. My node works just fine.
reply
Obfuscation is a pseudo solution
reply