Topic: Lightning Network Observer - page 14. (Read 13674 times)

Ok I understand that you want to manage your wallet and therefore also the channels, you could also consider making yourself a very simple node with Umbrel and manage it with Zeus from IOS

That may well be enough of a status update to dissuade me from wanting to venture into that one (referring to Blixt).. so then I am back to Breez and Phoenix as the ones that I am planning to try out..


Well mostly I am wanting to just have lightning available to me and I also want to get comfortable enough to recommend newbies, in my circle of acquaintance to start with which ever ones that I had chosen to use... so yeah, I will use first, and then hopefully recommending other newbies.. and perhaps largely non-technical folks to start to use whatever I am using.  In theory.. so we will see if I have to change my expectations along the way.


Maybe I will look at it again..? I don't know.. Anita did say that it is very user friendly.. but surely it is problematic to get tied into both custodial and closed source, so just like Anita was discussing, I do not like the idea of recommending that others get tied into any of those kinds of custodial and closed sources either... so I am thinking that it might not be a good idea to take the easy and lazy way... even though maybe it has some features that I might want to test out.. . just to know about them.. perhaps? perhaps?


Well part of my motivation to add wallets has to do with Blue wallet closing down its lighting wallet that I had been using.. so I have to look for a replacement.. and OBW does not work on IOS... ..

Blixt is a good wallet but too immature yet in beta testers.  First of all you should consider how you want to use LN, do you just want to play a little with little funds?  (recommended) or do you want to move large quantities?  (not recommended).

If you consider the first choice then go for a custodial wallet like Wallet of Satoshi or you can increase the fun by using the wallet bot on telegram @LightningTipBot and manage it from Zeus.

If, on the other hand, you want to choose a non-custodial one, then blue wallet is an excellent choice or even OBW but you must make sure you backup the open channels or you risk losing the funds.

O.k.. yeah.. that link worked better than the previous one that did not work... ...,

Thanks.. I spent a bit of time looking through the article and some of the articles that were linked therein too, and I am not going to say that I understood all of the things.. but the article did bring to my attention that if I might still be considering Breez and Phoenix as possible lightning network wallets to try out, then maybe I might want to consider trying out Blixt too? 

Blixt seems to be in a similar category as Breez in terms of several of its features, but I had not heard many (if any) folks really talking about Blixt.. so maybe I will add that to my LN wallets that I actually try out and maybe not.. maybe I will become a chicken, instead?.. time will tell.. and likely one wallet at a time.. perhaps over a day or two.. in the coming week or two?...

I like your wall of text to say: "Broken Link!"

Here is the link you searched for:
Lightning Wallets Comparison

Original link also fixed.

Based on your posting from a few days ago fillippone, I had wanted to look into some of the lightning wallet comparison matters, and when I clicked on the link that you had provided, nothing opened  - causing me to web search based on the descriptors contained therein...  which was "lightning 20 wallets 20 comparison"..

Even though my search did not directly bring me to anything exactly with those descriptors, I did find a very recent article on Bitcoin Magazine from Anita Posch - and she is such a great explainer and surely a bitcoin advocate, an open source and self-sovereign advocate with generally great rationales in terms of attempting to figure out trade-offs - including her concerns that sometimes when folks (normies) go into a kind of trusting / custodial mode, they will sometimes get sucked into (lulled like a sleepy baby into) the ease and convenience of such custodial services which might disincentivize them from becoming truly self-sovereign and attempting to control their funds.

Here's a link to her piece:  https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/top-bitcoin-lightning-wallets-in-slow-internet

For sure, I am not even proclaiming to be very self-sovereign myself because many of us who are not able to read the code and even some of us who are using walled-garden Apple/IOS products are having to trust others to read the code and others to NOT put overly encumbered spy/rug pulling mechanisms into their closed sourced hardware (that is limited by their software) products.

Part of my recent motivation had been BlueWallet's announcement that they were no longer going to be offering their custodial lightning product that I had started to use some time in late last year, so yeah I am fairly a newbie in terms of actually attempting to interact with the lightning network - even if in somewhat trusted ways... through that BlueWallet product.

Even though Anita is mostly ONLY comparing around 7 lightning network wallet products (namely BlueWallet, Breez, Muun, Phoenix, Wallet of Satoshi, Zap and Zeus), she did seem to be hitting upon some of my concerns regarding some of the trade offs in terms of the Breez wallet, the Phoenix wallet and her concerns regarding how come Wallet of Satoshi had been becoming so popular in recent times...

On a personal level, I frequently have a decent amount of reluctance to be adding too many things to my life at one time, so when BlueWallet announced that it was discontinuing the custodial aspect of their lightning wallet, I had been considering that I just want to move to one wallet.. and be done with it.. yet, after reading Anita's article, I remain torn enough to likely just suck up the additional time to just plan to add both Breez wallet and Phoenix wallet and to see how the set up of each of those go.. and yeah, so far I have not done anything besides saying that I am going to do it.. so what I actually end up doing may well play out differently, and it may be worth a follow up to describe if their had been any issues regarding the set up of either (or both of those).. so I have funds to move from BlueWallet and then it looks like I have to set up initial channels on each of them.. which would likely be from on chain BTC wallets into each of those services.. the other thing is just making sure that I am comfortable with however I end up choosing to back up each of them.. so yeah, even when wallets (or any other new thing) may well seem to be easy to set up, it seems to be part of the process that any of us might not want to get too far over our skiis in terms of setting things up but then not having had adequately figured out our back ups... and/or keeping those back ups organized... I have some ways that I have access to coins through some of my devices, but I have troubles figuring out how to back them up, so sometimes the solution might be to move the coins (value) to some other mechanism in which a back up seems to be available (or known how to access.. prior to either losing the device or sometimes just having one device can lead to several kinds of vulnerabilities... that some of us might not realize that our devices and our back ups are all in the same place and what would happen if our house burnt down, for example)...

We need a bath of realism.
We are still so early, that missteps, errors, scams and complete turnaround are still very possible, or rather in some more advanced questions, light LN; should be considered pretty normal.
So I Like @franky1, who tries to point those faults , not to make fun of it, but to learn from errors.

Edit: how comes the gif are out of orders? Too big?

Franky in this thread...

chivo (el salvador) no longer supports LN (chivo and strike went their separate ways)

instead there is a middle man custodial service that acts
as a gateway from fiat <> chivo
as a gateway from btc <> chivo
as a gateway from fiat <> btc

and as a separate service
as a gateway from btc <> msat

chivo does not use lightning directly anymore. it uses a custodial service
(alphapoint) / river financial

..again lightning was in chivo sept 2021-december(strike partnership)
but due to bottlenecks and liquidity issues. el salv dropped it and went with alphapoint as a custodial service.

For the beginners out there, an old article has just been updated with the latest version of LN and a few wallets:


Lightning Wallets Comparison





As I said, the original article was first published a little bit more than a year ago, but it was updated and published at the beginning of this month.

channel creation without blockchain confirmed balance begins again
channel creating without confirms value locks


FRACTIONAL RESERVE LN balance
Msats with no bitcoin confirmed value peg

good luck with that

https://docs.voltage.cloud/flow/flow-2.0
Demo of Flow 2.0, the new Voltage LSP

YOU guys have been saying it

you guys have been saying that lightning "is" bitcoin thus not different
you guys have been saying that bitcoin cant do XYZ and people should use lightning instead

promoting LN as the "solution" the best way forward compared to onchain scaling and all your other blurb trying to promote lightning as the best case scenario to move forward and where bitcoins on scaling wont work and such

the crap of you lot saying lightning is ontop.. and hating when i call lightning a SUB network
how you lot want people to think of lightning as a bitcoin 2.0. when reality is that lightning is not even a bitcoin network. but a subnetwork bridge for multiple currencies
(even poon called it a cross-border network for multiple currencies)

i know you now want to pretend you lot never said the snake oil sales pitches. but your post histories show more about the blurb you have said previously, compared to what you are trying now to say that you didnt say


even today doomads forum-husband said "no one said LN payments are complete and confirmed"
i then reminded him of 14 minutes before that where he said ln payments were confirmed.
then as soon as he remembered. he then went on to say that he thinks LN payments are confirmed.

forgetting that in this topic he was trying to say that he never said that ln payments were confirmed, before just now saying ln payments are confirmed

in short doomad and blackhatcoiner cant even remember what they are trying to say and change their narrative and then deny having a narrative.

Stop with the false equivalences already.  

"different to" ≠ "better than"

No one is saying LN is "better" than Bitcoin.  That's merely what you erroneously infer with your broken brain every time you hear someone utter the word "Lightning".  

Normal people have normal conversations about LN.  And then you suddenly barge in screeching "eVeRyOnE iS sAyInG liGhTnInG iS bEtTaR tHaN bItCoIn!!!!111one" when that couldn't be further from the truth.  Please train your brain to be less psycho.  It would be greatly appreciated.



//EDIT:


Then you'll have no trouble quoting it verbatim, then.  Go right ahead.  I'll wait.  You find the quote and show it to us.  

For anyone else reading this, notice how when I call franky1 a fascist, I can provide quotes of times when he has spouted authoritarian shite about how devs shouldn't be allowed to code things that franky1 doesn't approve of.  Yet when he claims I've said something, he refuses to provide a quote.  I have never stated that Lightning is better than Bitcoin.  Therefore franky1 will be unable to provide a quote to back up his spurious claims.  It's clear that franky1 will just keep lying and continue to be the most dishonest piece of shit on this entire forum.

they are not settled. because the destinations of value can be revoked, changed, reassigned.(re-instated(new states)) they are not settled because they are not on the immutable ledger

imagine you had btc balance in a utxo. which you lock to use in lightning
lightning still sees you have collateral.
but whomever you pay in LN has no record in bitcoin of them receiving that value.
thus at this point you still own all the collateral.
value signed to someone else is not confirmed as being that someone elses because its not confirmed..
much like never trusting CEX exchanges, because if the value is not on your key in a confirmed utxo its not your value
(#NotYourKEYNotYourBTC)

understand why cypherpunks for decades were running into the same problems for their digital money idea's until bitcoins blockchain idea come to be

understand the things blockchains solved in 2009.
the idea of LN is not new and above blockchains. its actually old and predates blockchains.
yep "smart contracts" are old tech

they are not finalised settled. they are just (weak)promises of future (alterable)settlements. but where there are still flaws which can break them promises. thus they are not even good promises.

learn what bitcoin is and what lightning is and how they are different. and what works and doesnt work

you have been fooled or trained to think lightning is better then bitcoin. its not

I can confidently say the same about your brain. I have never argued that a lightning transaction is reversible. What I previously said is in favor of my point, which is: lightning transactions aren't faith-based.

They are not confirmed in the traditional, on-chain manner, but they're settled, and so, confirmed. They're just not confirmed on the base layer. They will be at some point in the future, after both parties consent to close the channel.

Stop calling it "just signed". The users don't "just sign" transactions in the traditional manner. They sign that if one of them cheats, the other can punish him. That isn't "just sign". It's more than that.

your memory must be the shortest memory i have seen yet
you wrote in this topic that you never argued X
just 14 minutes after you actually said that lightning is confirmed


that topic was talking about lightning payments.

see what i mean you say that lighting is confirmed. and then pretend in this topic that you never said that lightning payments are confirmed..

how can you be so manipulative to say such obvious contradictory things in such a short time. but then pretend you dont contradict what you are saying

even if its just in signed unbroadcast state within lightning and not yet sent to the bitcoin network for confirm. you pretend its still confirmed without the actual confirm

..
reality is lightning payments are not confirmed/settled/final
they are just iou promised.. because they are yet to be complete/confirmed/settled

I never argued that a signed transaction is completed.

I never argued the opposite.

I argued that states prior the latest are revoked, the last one is what we're currently acknowledging as valid. States cannot be revoked unless both parties consent. Therefore, a lightning user can't have his state revoked without his consent; only if he wants to make another transaction.

It's not a promise state if you're not dependent to a promise. The other partner can go offline, cheat, leave, whatever, but I will have everything needed to punish him with penalty. I'm not dependent to him, and therefore to any promise. It's completely trustless.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/03/02/xapo-bank-integrates-bitcoins-lightning-network-partners-with-lightspark/
https://cointelegraph.com/news/xapo-bank-enables-faster-bitcoin-payments-with-lightning-network
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/xapo-bank-partners-with-lightspark-becoming-the-first-fully-licensed-private-bank-to-offer-near-instant-bitcoin-payments-through-lightning-network-integration-301760777.html
https://thebittimes.com/xapo-bank-enables-faster-bitcoin-payments-with-lightning-network-tbt39809.html
https://www.xapobank.com/blog/another-first-xapo-bank-now-supports-lightning-network-payments

a transaction is a transaction when signed but that does not mean its complete/final. it just means it fits the format and specifics of being a transaction.
its basic contract law and common sense of thousands of years

confirmations is about being settled/immutable/finalised

you just admitted that states change and can be revoked and be invalidated.. thus not confirmed unofficially or officially
and not actually finalised. thus its still in the promise state. the owing state wher terms and promised can be broken, changed..

..until its confirmed and immutable (aka settled) on the blockchain

i know you have been learning crap from your forum-wife. but do try for once to learn about things like consensus, signatures contracts, confirmations immutability oh and learn not all transactions end up in blocks (that last one is a big thing that your forum-wife does not understand)

oh and there are MANY ways to scam people on lightning and make them lose value and also receive faked value thats not even pegged to a locked utxo