Replies (4)

I mostly agree Vitor, but it depends on what you mean by "everything". A zap is a public record that one person made a payment to another person The question is whether the public record should also (implicitly or explicitly, it doesn't matter) point to the on-chain transaction That appears to be the real issue you all are discussing, and the issue would still exist even if each payment was to a different address Define "Noisy Payment" as a Silent Payment, but with a public event linking to the txid. Would that be a fix for onchain zaps, because it avoids address reuse; or equally harmful because the public can still see all the transactions?