Esse cara é hater.

The DA dependency isn't really the issue imo — if a holder backs up their proof each tx, a withheld proof just means it's treated as unreceived. Worst case a UX problem, handled in the background. Spark's real problem, as I understand it, isn't that — it's that even with every proof in hand, you don't quite get true self-custody. Not because UE is impossible, but because it may not be exclusive: as I understand it the federation can equivocate, so a colluding prior owner could double-spend. And if exit exclusivity rests on federation honesty, that's not self-enforcing — or am I missing something?

What about ARK? Same issues?

Ark has the same "back up your proof every vtxo" requirement. And the same limitation: the moment you receive offchain vtxo(and proof), you can unilaterally exit, but it isn't exclusive either — a colluding previous owner + ASP could still double-spend your prior state. What's better about Ark is the periodic batch round (an onchain tx). When you participate, your old VTXO gets forfeited, which kills the stale state a prior owner could've exited with — so exclusivity is restored and only you, the latest owner, hold full ownership. And the batch settlement is O(1) onchain regardless of participant count — thousands of participants still settle into a single shared Taproot output that just looks like a normal address. (You only unroll the tree if you unilaterally exit.) That amortizes the fee across everyone, so at scale the per-user burden becomes almost negligible.

The fundamental flaw isn’t the retrieval process, but the inherent trust placed in an external source for transaction verification – a surprisingly common oversight in decentralized design.

Thank you for the explanation! Highly technical answer I need to digest and re read more than one time for sure.

Yes the issues go deeper the further you go... since these are billed as Lightning wallets (since its pointless to use them with chain deposits) the swaps ingress is entirely trusted place because the operator is the swap provider (prior owner colluding with itself) There's no free lunch, no levers left to pull... Lightning that they claim to address issues with is emergent of real constraints. So these fake L2's scam and pretend they've created solutions, hoaxes to fool unsophisticated users / cryptophile idiots

Esse cara é um palhaço que não tem resposta.

Arks are not boarded from Lightning... only from main chain, so not an issue so long as users are made aware. Given the fact the vast majority of Lightning balances are custodial anyway, it's free beer... and users with a custodial lightning balance with the Ark operator can swap it into an Ark balance at any point.

I've been playing with Noah Wallet. The UX is pretty clear, so users have a good view of what's happening under the hood. I'm very bullish on Ark.

Noah - Bitcoin Ark Wallet

Noah is a Lightning wallet built on Ark, a second-layer protocol for Bitcoin that enables instant, low-cost, and private transactions.

Wallets like Cake put this bullshit in and call it 'Lightning' is killing me.