Topic: USDT to Launch on Bitcoin's LN (Taproot assets) (Read 277 times)

This makes much more sense. I don't actually know any use case of Tron other than its cheap transaction fees, and that's it. But I have to admit that TRC-20 is the most popular chain for USDT transactions. People use this chain for lower transaction fees. As of now, some other blockchains such as BEP-20, polygon, and some others charge similar fees.

Back to the main topic, I don't think this development will change much. People do not want the hassle of running a lightning node. People do not even use lightning networks that much to transact Bitcoin just because they have to run a lightning node.

 

"Scripts"? About you? What are you calling "Scripts" about you? You mean the TRUTH?

Did everyone see that? That's Gaslighting 101 from sophisticated trolls such as frankandbeans. Trustworthy people, like Greg Maxwell and Andrew Chow, just teaching people about Bitcoin and these anti-Bitcoin trolls always come in to disrupt the discussion.

But currently, not like 2017 - 2018, they won't mention nor will they shill their Lord Roger Ver's shitcoin called BCash because that would be too obvious.

I am not having high hopes from Liquid Network also, since this is federated network, and it has CEO with company Bloxkstream.
Sure it can be useful if you want to swap between Bitcoin and stablecoins without touching shitcoins, but I wouldn't hold any Liquid assets long term.
It's going to be interesting to see if activity on Lightning will increase now with USDT token, and to compare it with L-USDT.

windfury, again you are just repeating scripts doomad told you.(boring, empty and heard many times before..) but your ignorance of taproot and ordinals being proof of my critique to gmax 2016-2019 is highly transparent

also try to use your own mind and realise YOU are the one supporting the adoption of other networks
realise doomad duped you into being a altnet supporter. wake up and think for yourself, without sounding like your mentor doomad. and stop ass kissing core devs like gods because that makes them YOUR overlords

learn terms like scrutiny, peer review, decentralisation.
learn that we should not be idolising core devs blindly like centralists or kings or lords.. they should not be setting the roadmap corruptly, nor have every discussion point moderated by them to control the path of bitcoin
just look who manages the roadmap, the github votes of priority.. the mods of this forum.. the mod of github.. notice the same names

just take some time independently to think outside the cult box doomad and co put you in

if you are still getting excited that you want people to adopt a counterfeit fiat-esq token on a crappy sub network of a credit-debt system. learn when and were you went wrong and start learning again outside the scripts

good luck

 

Greg Maxwell and Andrew Chow gave YOU a negative trust-rating because YOU are a disinforming FUDster who has been spreading lies, making up narratives, and gaslighting the people in the forum.

You're merely playing:4D Chess like Craig Wright. You are not to be trusted, and that negative trust-rating from two Core Developers should be seen by newbies before they read your posts.

gmax put negative rating due to me calling out how their edits to bitcoin code allowed junk data to be appended to the end of a tx.. and look what happened.. years later we have ordinals and taproot scripts which proved me right, proved them wrong... they just didnt like me calling them out on how it would affect bitcoin negatively(they had sponsored deals to keep things going in a certain roadmapped way)

welcome to reality. if you want to deny ordinals exists to continue ass kissing your overlord. do so , just be honest that your a blind sheep follower who doesnt care about anything but promoting crap features that manoeuvre people away from using bitcoin

enjoy your credit-debt system of counterfeit fiat, on a shoddy buggy subnetwork of unsettled value not guaranteed to be owned by the recipient..
no bitcoiner cares about using LN even with new features.. but continue believing that USDT will be LN's saviour.. you will learn soon enough that it wont help

P.S last autumn when devs started talking about adapting a few things to allow stablecoins on LN, the LN stats were:
nodes:18000     channels:48000     capacity: 5250

today now that USDT is being promoted, lets see if there is any gain/growth/adoption
nodes:16800⇓   channels:41000⇓   capacity:5175⇓

seems the gossip of future development didnt keep stats up, and now promoted publicly didnt grow stats to even get back to stats last quarter.. get the hint yet?

---

you are on a bitcoin forum, buy you are promoting a network thats losing adoption.. a network that is not bitcoin, a network that doesnt even have its own blockchain to secure value transfer, a network that just adopted a crap token that is fake emulating inflationary fiat.... wakey wakey, do you not even see your problem

 

LIES.

EVERYONE would merely look at your negative trust-rating, and EVERYONE would see that TWO of the most trusted people in BitcoinTalk, who are both Core Developers at that, are calling you a lying FUDster.

Plus they are not my "mentors" ser. There's network consensus behind them, the Core Developers. It's your Lord Roger Ver who has made "Flat-Earthers of Bitcoin" out of you, while he himself HODLs Bitcoin.

windfury, your mentor has taught you many lies..
i dont defend bitcoin cash. you have been listening to an idiot who has made YOU become one

you have had many years to wake up and do your own research but instead remained ignorant to advertise a alternate network(LN) pretending you are a bitcoiner
so how about wake up already and care about the btc network or continue acting childish whilst you promote other networks you prefer

only a small group of ignorant people you belong to*, truly beleive another network is "bitcoin". and thats the laugh of the last decade
the network you support is not secure, is not immutable, is not settled value, is not even value owned by the recipient. but if you wish to carry on adoring it then so be it, go play with our credit/debt system.
*you can tell its a small group of people due to lack of independent LN nodes

i do laugh that you think because i dont simply ass kiss core devs whilst they cludge up bitcoin just to manoeuvre people to other networks, that you think i must support a different network due to lack of ass kissing core devs.. you are mistaken
i support the btc network not some other network, i simply dont fear wanting to scrutinise the devs to ensure the btc network remains effective.
its you that wants other networks and you have overlords you idolise

but ill leave you to take another few years to wake up and realise your own mistakes you learned from your mentors that have directed you away from btc network utility, and thrusted you into a silly network that isnt really adopting anyone, even with alot  of attempts of adding features, which no one found relevant

if you have been taught recently to adore the buggy network your support because people should use it to store their value in a fiat-esq system(USDT) thats not deflationary, and also not even protected by fiats FDIC insurance. nor settled to be even truly owned by you when using it... then you have missed many lessons of economics, and you have been conned/scammed into believing in the wrong monetary/asset based system

 

It's in fact you who's acting like the idiot by convincing everyone, during the blockchain debate, that the block size increase will solve Bitcoin's adoption problem. Because if small blocks were actually the "actual problem", then yes, the con that YOU actually call "Bitcoin Cash", the same shitcoin that YOU actually defend as "also Bitcoin", would have already been massively adopted.

Your Lord Roger Ver and his BCash scam can't deceive the community no longer.

USDT to Launch on Bitcoin's LN (Taproot assets) well I mean this is a good thing if really true since taproot is way way much faster than the regular Bitcoin network and much cheaper too and I agree if tether or other companies start to do the same.

bank? pfft. more so credit cards.. enjoy working it out in your own time

Your hatred of the Lightning Network may be well-documented, but by no means is anybody forcing you to use it.

But if it works out fine in the end then you can't be surprised when other people say "I told you so".

It's literally just P2WSH scripts on the Bitcoin network restricting access to the bitcoins. Does that sound like a bank to you?

not only are you saying people should hand funds over to a middle-man upfront
not only are you saying to then be given ''inbound balance' (credit/debt) not settled to a key you control
not only are you saying to be locked into a unsettled balance of FAIT based tokens that dont deflate

but you think that its all good economic advice..
dang you lot should be comedians
(the silliness of fools thinking they are still playing with "bitcoin" when even a 5yo can see they are not)

goodluck with your other network games. ill stick with the btc network, hoarding actual btc on my utxo's i have the keys for

It was time. Shitcoins took advantage of bitcoin’s absence in this area and look how big they got. Solana, ethereum and even that scam tron. They all are having a feast because bitcoin (ln) devs was slow to develop these stuff. It finally happened tho that means these shitcoins lost their best use case.

What good is tron if people don’t use it to transact usdt? Nothing. Same goes for the others.

I expect Bitcoin dominance to rise considerably in a few years if not months. (Might happen sooner or not)

That "middleman value-locking service" is literally so that you can get paid at the speed of card transactions. Minus the 2-week holding period.

It might be hard to set up, which is a barrier to adoption, but it's pretty good for buying pizza with your BTC.

Just open Strike and deposit some cash or put some BTC in an Electrum trampoline and see for yourself.

People are surprised by this news because the information and expectations of Bitcoin Lighting is messed up. They made people believe that Bitcoin lighting is easy to use, it's simple and fast while in reality it's very complicated for an average user to use. It's also very impractical to use too. You are right, LN has failed!

Bitcoin is successful, right? Do we need to use it as a payment method or do we need to use it as wealth storage? I think that we need most but most importantly, we should value Bitcoin because it's a good P2P payment method, one of the most decentralized coin, compared to other coins. Bitcoin's popularity and increased adoption mean that many people want to use Bitcoin as a payment method. If we don't increase the block size, it will become impossible for people to use Bitcoin and then they'll move on altcoins that offer fast and cheap transactions. 1 MB block size was normal during satoshi's era but after that, everything has advanced and some old things have to change for a better future.

As I said above, bigger blocks are necessary but it's not the reason why Bitcoin Cash is not successful, this coin has many other problems and one of the most important problem is that they don't listen to others and promote a false propaganda.

oh windfury you do try too hard to act the idiot too often

the reason people avoid an altcoin is because its an altcoin. you trying to say people avoid an altcoin because they dont want to perform more transactions(facepalm).. now that is the true laugh

anyway you have fun on your alternative network called LN and you keep pretending its "bitcoin" because it is funny to see YOU act the same as r.ver. trying to promote another network as "bitcoin".. the worse thing is that the network you idolise does not even have a blockchain to secure its payments as they happen, so you have a system that relies on being unsettled IOU credit/debt based. because your network you love so much does not settle payments as they happen, meaning lots and lots of ways to steal funds or not guaranteeing final settlement, which is where the issue of secure money had not been solved prior to bitcoins invention 15 years ago.. a system requiring secondary, third person trust, mutual agreement. is a system that is old tech that ends in failure... lessons learned 16+ years ago before blockchain became the solution

in short if its not locked to a blockchain, its not 'real money'. but goodluck with your games and toys. when you are ready to grow up and learn about economics and join the big boys club on the proper network which is the BTC blockchain. stop thinking the only options are bch or LN as the only option for those that want to transact often. ill stick to using btc and ill continue scrutinising and critiquing the btc devs because thats what people should do, scrutinise their government who control the system people use. and yes core devs are bitcoins government and we should hold them accountable

no one wants to use LN(for serious stuff) or BCH. they are just too polite to ask btc devs to get off their lazy asses and progress btc sooner. out of fear of retaliation.
(especially when the main retaliating dev and forum mod whom controls BTC development discussion, literally wants to stab (in a anti-merit forum feature way) forum users who wish btc to progress without being told to use other networks)

but please do carry on playing around with your IOU balance thats not settled to you on your silly buggy network. one day you will wise up. but until then have fun playing with money thats not yours, funds not on your keys, balance not on a utxo you control. (when you are the receiver of incoming balance). you will learn the hard way one day of the troubles cypherpunks had trying to create digital money

 

Ser? The behavior of Bitcoin's users isn't caused by Lightning, nor will it be avoided even if the network went into consensus behind increasing the block size. Because if bigger blocks actually was the answer to user adoption, then explain your Lord Roger Ver's BCash.

 


Those builders are "fan girls" because they want to build something on Lightning for stablecoin transactions?

  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Laughable opinion.

Two years ago, I 'd argue against it and I 'd completely try to change your mind.
Unfortunately, diving deeper into Bitcoin and learning more stuff about it, I 'll silently agree today...
My next personal task is to try to understand Liquid. I hope I won't get disappointed as well.

As for the news about USDT, it's good, at least in my eyes.

yep LN is a failed experiment. 7 years later its still only hoarding 5k btc and that mainly service hubs that have been open for years, yet USER adoption didnt follow
yep independent user onboarding/offboarding, inflow/outflow, locking/settling, adoption/abdication isnt happening

its the LN fangirls trying desperately to try making LN interesting. no one is silly enough to lock value into a system requiring middlemen

I don't understand why people are surprised by this news.... lightning network was never meant to be bitcoin-only.
Tether is maybe playing 3d chess here and they are probably trying to mitigate risks with new mica regulations and USDT ban in EU.
For me LN is a failed project and I don't expect anything special out of this, but let's see what happens.

Lack of demand because of expensive Bitcoin transaction fees in the past and appearances of altcoin blockchain with cheaper transaction fees.

With Bitcoin Lightning Network, transaction fee will be very tiny and cheap, so USDT on Bitcoin LN will be competitive enough with USDT on altcoin blockchains. If picking between Bitcoin Lightning Network and altcoin blockchains, I think Bitcoin Lightning Network is safer and more secured.

USDT itself has big risks, just be careful when using USDT generally.
PSA: Most Stablecoins Can Be Frozen, Even in Your Own Wallets

Withdrawal fees plays major role in the revenue of an exchange so if they plan to integrate this model then it will affect their potential earnings so I doubt it will be encourages by any centralized platforms.

This integration will solve the long and expensive withdrawals of USDT from exchange with a better security but overall it's still USDT so it has no other real purpose beyond trading or is this the new way of infusing the fiat money into the crypto especially on bitcoin's network?

It's good to see more choice of using USDT without totally leaving Bitcoin network, since currently your only choice is using Liquid network (Bitcoin sidechain). Let's hope it'll be followed by more wallet, exchange and service supporting LN (along with Taproot assets).

Anything that reduces costs and improves Bitcoin’s scalability is definitely a good thing.

I think USDT really needs this, especially after European exchanges started banning it, which surely cut into their profits.
With this development, and hopefully with exchange support, people might start using off-chain transactions more for faster and cheaper transfers.

If major exchanges get on board, I can see this plan having a real chance of success.

I need to dig deeper into the articles, but the news is great, in my opinion.
It would be another victory for BTC in the long run.

As you all know, USDT first started in Bitcoin's omni layer, but ended up discontinuing it due to the lack of demand.

Well, here they are now, announcing that they'll start to support Bitcoin again through the lightning network[1][2].

If exchanges jump aboard and start supporting Taproot assets USDT, I think this is just a matter of time until we see other stablecoins or tokens on Bitcoin's blockchain.

[1] https://x.com/lightning/status/1885083485678805424
[2] https://cointelegraph.com/news/tether-usdt-stablecoin-integrates-bitcoin-lightning