Hardware wallets and self-hosted Lightning have been catastr...

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "296880ce6bb39c827a657eb9ce61849f149c13e5984fcb945f4412e6d6e02692",
  "pubkey": "dd664d5e4016433a8cd69f005ae1480804351789b59de5af06276de65633d319",
  "created_at": 1788075434,
  "tags": [
    [
      "client",
      "imwald"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "Hardware wallets and self-hosted Lightning have been catastrophic for the adoption of Bitcoin as currency. I think this is what we're finding out.\n\nYou don't spend money you've put on a hardware wallet, and the \"feel\" of using an ETF mimics a hardware wallet.\nSelf-hosted Lightning nodes are constantly offline, erroring out, have channels down, etc. Only the professionally managed ones (including Phoenix) actually work when you need them to work. And people are averse to moving their Bitcoin onto Lightning, as it's a pain to bring it back on-chain, and they get eaten up by fees.\n\nBitcoin's practical availability mimics a CD (certificate of deposit). I.e., it's purposefully put in places that make it difficult to spend. You need advanced notice and preparation to get it moving, and even then I'm often standing there, watching them fiddle around on their laptop or cell phone like, \"Oh, give me a minute; looks like my server is facing a DDoS... erm... oof, kinda doesn't work right now... Don't be hatin, okay, but do you take cash?\" On-chain Bitcoin should theoretically be easier, but the way people store on-chain Bitcoin -- locked into a treasure chest and dug into the roots of the tree in the backyard -- it's even less available than Lightning.",
  "sig": "abf7b99057e89d28bc413f42adb30307d78a08427a49b99e4244aac3c6ed6f3934fcf3ce05b65e86fb129f742305a06b955014e2096129aadf907bf45c7119e1"
}