> Should be easy since my Monero address is on my profile.
The ones on the blockchain aren't the same as the one in your profile. Nonetheless, it's better to (1) not publish them (2) encrypt them so that fewer people can see them. You know, like lightning does.
> Lightning nodes on a route (aka third parties) can see exact amounts passing through them. Nodes on Monero can't.
In both cases they get partial amount information. Monero leaves the fee unencrypted and in fact publishes it for all to see, and this is one of the tools chain analysts use to fingerprint what type of wallet you're using. Lightning does not publish the amount info, the routing nodes only get a lower bound on the amount sent; they don't know the full amount because they don't know if a multipath payment was used, and they also don't know the total fee paid because that's encrypted -- each routing node only knows how much you paid *them.*
> most LN payments are routed through a handful of large hubs
...he said, with no evidence
> ~90% of Lightning users don't enjoy almost any of the privacy benefits you lay out because they're using things like Wallet of Satoshi or Strike that see everything
Wallet of Satoshi and Strike don't see everything. Here's two critical details they're in the dark about: (1) they don't know what address the recipient receives the money into (neither the channel nor the htlc), because lightning invoices do not tell you that. (2) They don't know if the person who looks like the recipient is really the recipient or not (it might be a trampoline payment and they have no way to tell). Not even the sender knows that.
> Monero is better UX for privacy and it's by default
Monero has worse privacy under its slick UX and some LN wallets have better UX anyway.
Login to reply
Replies (3)
I have a challenge for you. lnbc10641910p1p5pr6klpp5refgj5cv3k0zajlcz8hztfz4sezcv9e7hfwkv2z99m0p2mwx64dqhp5uwcvgs5clswpfxhm7nyfjmaeysn6us0yvjdexn9yjkv3k7zjhp2scqzdyxqyjwf3sp55u5qqhs88t5e5ag0d6gvacjkhfk5l7jdxc6usewu4xy8tp7y8xss9qxpqysgq0tcz422qrphc27m6xukk4xgjaawgp5ae003805wr9g3n4jrhp3hypd5tn2qj4smrc43fcfyjwlvpms0ydcjl7wchdpy2q4rst46e6ygp2vaqna
Pay this $1 lightning invoice and I will send you $1 in xmr to an xmr "public address" of your choice. We'll see which of us learns more info about where the money ends up. Are you up to the challenge?
I will tell you:
- what address the monero went into
- how much xmr is in that address in total
You tell me:
- what channel or htlc the bitcoin went into
- how much btc is in that address in total
Deal?
>"The ones on the blockchain aren't the same as the one in your profile"
Exactly lmao. Third parties gain zero knowledge from my profile address about who I am as a reciever on the blockchain.
> "...he said, with no evidence"
We've already been through this before. You challenged yourself and discovered most LN wallet downloads were non-private custodial wallets (in other words a moot point in saying they are private). A smaller fraction were non-custodial wallets that relied on LSPs like ACINQ (where they have a section on their page describing how they aren't private).
The incentives of Lightning drive towards these large hubs because they are more connected with less hops to your destination (less routing failures and cheaper fees).
>"Wallet of Satoshi and Strike don't see everything."
They see everything associated with you as a user. Your balance. The timing and amounts you receive and send. Plus they require personally identifiable information and accounts (especially Strike)
Why the double standard? Just a moment ago you were critical about Monero not encrypting fee amounts and now you're making excuses for Wallet of Satoshi and Strike being able to see much more.