You DO NOT need an attached wallet to receive rewards in sats. You can withdraw them at any time here:
The switch to CCs was made exclusively to avoid money transmission. We can pay you our own sats, which you can withdraw at any time.
pull down to refresh
Another PSA: this could be another way to assmilk SN for sats...
Boosting posts and comments with CC just to receive rewards in sats.
It is literally a washing machine.
That's why we still need the removal of leaderboard and rewards !
But yet again, many will ignore my warnings...
deleted by author
It's a total mess and misleading people.
Just an example:
LOL the logic on this is so broken.
This whole thing should be one or another. Only sats or only CCs.
This is exactly what I want—either choose one way, sats or CCs. They've made the system even worse than it was before. If you look at it broadly, it feels like a mess. Decentralized platforms shouldn’t work like this. To me, SN now feels completely centralized.
Yes but in any case, SN will remain a "pay to post" platform and not a "post to earn rewards" as many think it is...
I remember that, and I’ve proudly never denied that because paying keeps the cockroaches away.
deleted by author
How many times I warned about this? #722919
deleted by author
And what does it says IRS and all that bullshit crap agencies about this? This is not "money transmitting" anymore?
A reward = sats coming from posts and fees, forwarded to other stackers. That means transmitting.
WHAT A FUCKING MESS, for nothing.
No, it is not because money transmission means that Alice pays Bob through Carol. But rewards don't work that way, Alice does not specify who Bob is. Alice pays Carol and Carol decides what it wants to do with its own money.
LOL SN is the fucking intermediary.
You guys mess it up really hard.
deleted because I regret having replied to @DarthCoin in the first place.
Seems that the entire SN team do not understand it.
Bitcoin is money that NONE of govs can control and regulate. They have NO jurisdiction over it.
But yeah SN is such pussy.
There's NOTHING wrong with custodial sats (by SN). But now SN decided to create a mess with CCs and sats, and pretending to "respect" the law LOL. All for nothing.
It’s not a big deal
Why are you here then? Leave it as it is. SN is all good, you're a FUCKING MESS FOR NOTHING.
How's your ass-milking going? For your information, because I exposed you people, Monday and Friday bounty posts now have fewer sats on them—until your ASS-MILKER ASSOCIATION finds more ways or creates more accounts. Wait, your partner @coinsreporter, who owns major shares in your association, seems to be begging a lot. He's having a hard time grabbing sats. What are your next strategies? I'm sure this is the best time for you to make some copy-paste posts and fool the gullible stackers into zapping you. Go post something don't forget about climbing the 🪜 leaderboards 🐒.
Ohh wow! Mine is going fine and I'm sure Coinsreporter is also doing very well. You didn't do anything to expose anyone.
You're just exposing yourself everywhere.You're just exposing yourself everywhere.
NO SOUP FOR ASSMILKERS!
just to annoy you assmilker
Is PAY TO POST, remember?
Saddened grok couldn't explain to me what an assmilker refers to ...
Thanks
Can you clarify what people in the comments mean when they talk about money transmission and government control? Did the government take any action against SN? Were CC's introduced because of government regulations or orders?
Pro-active
what?
Can you please elaborate on how the switch to CCs helps avoid money transmission?
Do you think if a government intervention/audit (given these recent news) would end up in them interpreting SN as not breaking the rules of transmitting money with the new approach where sats are basically being routed from the Alice to Bob?
I know this wasn't the main focus of this post but I'm curious on how this will play out for SN and whether we can do anything to further mitigate these risks.
We are doing what a lightning node does in the application layer. We NEVER hold funds in transit.
If what we do is money transmission, then every single lightning node is also a money transmitter.
If that’s the case, SN being classified as a money transmitter should be the least of our concerns.
You are probably right, we'll have to wait and see how this will play out.
In any case, I think it's a valid and valuable exercise to model this as a threat to SN and discuss how can this vulnerability be addressed.
I don't want SN in trouble, hence the question/suggestion.
deleted by author
assmilking CCs 😂😂😂