When I think of custodial I don't think of Bitcoin anymore, I think of traditional banking where you're not fully in control anymore and the power of your funds is with someone else now. Yet again, not a real issue when dealing with small amounts of money -- though it still does present the problem of a lack of control -- something that we all love to talk about in the crypto community.
All valid points. However, exchanges hold hundreds of thousands if not millions of Bitcoins. Apparently many people don't seem to care about very large amounts, so a small amount for LN shouldn't matter.
I must stress yet again that I do like it, and have used it before. I just think that telling people that use Bitcoin, to go and use something that is inferior to Bitcoin in most ways (minus fees) isn't going to be easy. Sending Bitcoin to another person is easy -- you get their address and then you send it to them, that's it. No channels, no nodes, no making sure you're connecting with them.
I read about Bitcoin in the early versions, when transactions needed an IP-address to be sent
I can't wait to see what LN looks like 10 years from now.
Even in LN sending money is the easiest thing (which in my mind, isn't that easy when comparing it to Bitcoin) receiving money is an entire different issue altogether.
True. LN is easy to pay a merchant with an automated system, but more complicated to pay another forum user. Sending 1 satoshi to an online LN casino is easier than withdrawing 1 satoshi.
Love the concept, and I do hope that it succeeds. It's just tough to think about right now, when there are still so many issues with the network.
It's still experimental, and improving. Give it time
Oh yes, without a doubt. The current issue with this is that most people haven't been around in Bitcoin to understand the phrase -- "not your keys, not your coins" -- they continue to think that it won't happen to them (like what most people say about certain things) and they think that the law will help to protect them and to make them whole in the event of an issue of some sort. I think this is a pretty common thought among Western people, who have certain laws in place in traditional banking like the FDIC (In the US), to protect them in the event of a bank run, bank failure, etc. That to them it's seems foreign that you'd be able to lose your coins, forever, if a hack was to occur.
But yes, I do think a good amount of the speculators don't care about this, but the Bitcoin OG's truly do.
Will without a doubt give it time, and try to push this to as many people as possible.
Just for my own info, does EClair charge you any sort of fee to top up in Bitcoin to the wallet? I know that Wallet of Satoshi charges a fee for this feature.