128 sats \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 14 Oct \ on: SN elects to go noncustodial on Nov. 5th - FAQ & AMA
Ok, so I have two questions:
  1. Is this move because of fear of financial regulators or pressure from investors? Be honest, I won't judge. I'm not an anti-state maxi like some... I recognize the pragmatic need to follow the rules.
  2. The max fee for attached wallets is by default 1% of the transaction. 1% seems like a lot if, say, I want to withdraw 50k sats. On the other hand, 1% seems like too little (resulting in failed routes) if the transaction is small, like 100 sats.
    • How does SN deal with this?
    • How does it determine when to auto-withdraw?
    • Is every single zap a lightning transaction? Even if I want to zap just 1 sat?
write
preview
151 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b OP 14 Oct
  1. Fear of financial regulators. Fear of having to do this later, when we know it will eventually need to be done. Fear of lightning wallets that support apps and the protocol not being ready when we'll need to depend on them. Fear of non-custodial lightning not maturing because no one wants to put in the effort to try. If anything SN's investors had a small bias again us changing this early. My investors are the good kind - I do what I want and they like it that way.
  2. Your first two questions will not be relevant after Nov. 5th as SN won't have custody of sats before they are sent to you (autowithdrawals were an intermediate solution). To your last question, if the sender and recipient are using attached wallets and 1 sat can be routed between them successfully, yes that is a lightning transaction. If 1 cannot be routed between them, the recipient will receive cowboy credits unless they've indicated (via their settings) they'd rather receive nothing in such cases.
reply
324 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 15 Oct
Fear of non-custodial lightning not maturing because no one wants to put in the effort to try.
Fuck yes
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 11h
I wanted to add, re: investors, for anyone that might be a forum sleuth: startup investors are not as meddlesome as popular media would have you believe. And, even if they were, I own 89% of SN and have not signed away any future voting rights.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 14 Oct
:Thumbs up: to question 1.
To question 2, if no route can be found, and a cowboy credit is created instead, where does the sat go?
I will make an educated guess that the sat stays in the zapper's wallet, then the zappee receives +1 CC and the zapper is deduced -1 CC. Is that correct?
reply
33 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 14 Oct
The sat is paid to SN, which in turn creates a cowboy credit and assigns it to the receiver.
If the sender has CCs in their wallet, rather than creating a CC, we'll just transfer it to the receiver like sats are transferred today.
reply