I said you can run your own Spark. Their Spark has closed set of SOs, like Liquid has a closed set of operators and Arkade has one.

That's why I'm pushing everyone (Spark and Arkade) to implement confidential transactions (Spark has it in its roadmap). Liquid has it and we support it. That's why we'll keep pushing Lightning, bolt12, trampoline nodes and PTLCs. You're highly exaggerating the current privacy properties. Pure Lightning privacy isn't great to say the list...

Btw, you, Alby or Zeus could also provide a spreadsheet... A full one from rizful (custodial service) that contains amounts and destinations, and partial one from Megalith (forward history). The government doesn't need to send many emails to get the full picture... You don't like David Marcus, I get it, but you're not calling out pure Lightning players like Phoenix or other sub-networks like Arkade.

The LDK version is not out yet... I don't think we're "pushing" Spark more than we "pushed" Liquid. I do like Spark better because it's BTC and not L-BTC and it has unilateral exit, unlike Liquid. Perhaps Baader–Meinhof phenomenon on your end?

We're committing to Lightning decentralization. I'm doing that not just by supporting native Lightning (we're working and making great progress with the native LDK version), but also by making sure Lightning is the common language between different sub-networks. We added Liquid, we're adding Spark, soon Arkade and maybe more L2s (granted they use BTC and gave unilateral exit).

We are supporting it in the LDK SDK... We just had to switch from Greenlight to LDK. You can see here for example: https://github.com/breez/breez-sdk-greenlight/commit/9024160e09436df4ced56bdbae42b245c7feac2d

It's unilateral exit. You don't need their permission to exit to the chain.

We have partners bundling Liquid and Spark in their apps. You just need one on-chain transaction to switch between them (https://github.com/breez/spark-sdk/blob/87b856a97b4b94cf2c1d7960aa7dca3dce62e121/crates/spark/src/services/unilateral_exit.rs#L59). Same would be to move to Arkade, LDK, etc.

Oh come on... There's only one Spark now... Same as there's only one Liquid now and only one Arkade...

We use to have one LSP. When we added the LSP spec, we added a configuration for multiple LSPs (there's still no good discovery API).

Same when an LSP goes down...

No, they will switch to a different sub network or native Lightning.

They did release the server side code: https://github.com/buildonspark/spark/tree/main/spark

I don't control Spark... And yes, they are in control on the Spark operators.

There aren't many LSPs with enough liquidity... See how many Alby is actually using. You know how I know? Because I am the one on-boarding them... I'm the one getting calls asking which LSPs to use (and yes, I am sending them your way).

Ah? What are you talking about? We are a client side library that provide a Lightning interface on top of native Lightning and different sub networks (Spark, Liquid, Arkade, etc). You don't like Spark, you can move to Liquid or to Arkade or to LDK. And we're completely open source...

I'm not "shitting" on open standards... I'm saying that LSPs are also a centralizing factor, very similar to sub networks. The SSP interface in Spark in actually public, the implementation is the only closed source in Spark. But, you can run your own Spark and implement your own SSP today if you want to. If you run your own Spark, we'll support it as well ootb. Same goes for Arkade.

Yes, it's that easy. As switching to another LSP. We actually make it very easy... You continue to spread FUD and demonstrate a complete lack of understanding on the underlying implementations.

Multiple sub-networks: Liquid, Spark, soon Arkade and any other L2 with unilateral exit. You feel comfortable bashing Spark, I don't see you do the same for Arkade. I wonder why.

You also keep ignoring we're investing in native Lightning. We had to deprecate Greenlight (not because we didn't try), but we're not giving up and will release an LDK implementation very soon (months of work already invested).

But what do you care... You keep FUDing us because you don't like Spark. Grow up.

Which use a centralized API to your LSP lol. Breez is decentralizing by connecting multiple sub-networks. A new LDK-based SDK is also coming soon.

I built the open LSP standard he builds his products on. Our entire code base is completely open source. We provide multiple options with no vendor lock. I got Boltz to open source their stack. He's the one building custodial services. He's the one spreading, pushing his LSP services which has similar trade-offs to spark (which he clearly don't understand because he doesn't understand Lightning). Don't legitimize this behavior.

It says more than that. Bindings, LNURL, Lightning addresses etc. It's a private beta for selected partners atm. You can email us or fill out the form if your interested.

It's described in the link above

We're in a private beta right now: https://breez.technology/spark/

I think I'm following my own advice, I just allow myself to use the best tools for the job and acknowledging there's no one size fits all when it comes to last mile solutions.

Lightspark started a Lightning SaaS, hence the name. Spark evolved internally, and it's a play on the company's name.

Live-ness if someone is trying to cheat you mean. But, you can receive payments when you're offline...

You really don't need me to explain the UX advantages of not using channels, right?

You lost me with "just another centralized exchange"... If want to have a technical discussion, let's have one, but shouting "scam" on everything that isn't using a channel, comparing it to a centralized exchange is just nonsense.

What you did here is the definition of FUD. You're a technical person, judge the technical solution. I'm a Bitcoiner. I think Spark is technically a step forward. I don't care who invented it.