The concern with on chain "zaps" is less that the transaction itself is public, and more that the utxo's history and future become public for all to see along with what essentially amounts to kyc at that point in time. Lightning zaps, on the other hand, are public -- however, thanks to onion routing and the lack of a shared public ledger, that is ALL that is public. This seems to be the krux of the concern. On chain zaps CAN be handled safely, but it adds the requirement that both parties address this with things like coinjoins, swaps, etc, which adds unnecessary costs and of course, room for things to go wrong.

Replies (2)

I think the problem is that people can see the balance if people dont move those UTXOs. Because in the end, you can get all the zap events on lightning and just rebuild a chain, since most people just re-circulate those zaps back into nostr. It's not a verifiable chain, but it is a chain nonetheless.
Curious, not sure how accurate this is. Though most, as in, over 50%, yea, probably. I definitely spend at Square from the same wallets I zap with, and replenish through things like ZBD and Satsman (and you know, purchases).