I just wish people didn't assumed we made this because we don't know the risks. We are doing it in spite of knowing the risks and knowing, using and sometimes helped develop all the other solutions out there. Or, at least, I am.

Replies (20)

There's a difference between ignorance and informed defiance. The latter is rarer, and infinitely more valuable. Building Bitcoin privacy tools while fully aware of the surveillance landscape is the only honest approach.
So, uh, you guys made a risky decision and are using this to motivate other people to develop safer solutions or something? Or am I missing the point?
To be fair I called it a "terrible idea" but the spirit is the same.
That's exactly the tradeoff we are choosing to make things work at all times. The sender wants to send you money. It doesn't matter if you want to receive or not. The money will be there for you if you look for it. If you don't want it, those coins are essentially burned and everyone is a bit richer. The sender has the freedom to send. The receiver has the freedom to not receive or not even see it. Everybody gets what they want out of this.
El Guirri's avatar
El Guirri 3 weeks ago
So I ended up with some onchain sats in my amethyst wallet which I check d after seeing notification. Opened wallet today thinking I'd just send them to you for devs. Amethyst says wallet unavailable 🙄
...and normie users losing their nsecs and thus unbeknownst burning coins is ok?
FreeYoda's avatar
FreeYoda 3 weeks ago
Not good.... But not as bad as: "I don't understand Bitcoin, but let me fix it for you" 🤣
yo's avatar
yo 3 weeks ago
It would really help if you shared your perspectives on the risks and how the tradeoffs of this implementation of onchain zaps address them and/or make them irrelevant, in detail. That'd help the discourse.