Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 448 posts

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#241

Post by dragonwriter »

olalonde wrote: post #238
jayd16 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know you're still supposed to collect all the same info for a BTC transaction, right? Just because it's easy doesn't mean it's not tax evasion.

No, you are not supposed to. KYC is a legal requirement for money transmitters[0]. It does not apply to Bitcoin users. [0] Money transmission is the act of receiving currency from one party and transferring it to another party. Basically, middlemen in a transaction (e.g. banks).

If you are processing financial transactions (including something of “value that substitutes for currency”) between other people at their direction, you are a money transmitter. The whole point of both Bitcoin is decentralizing this function from banks to a network of miners, and a similar thing is done in Lightning with its nodes.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#242

Post by olalonde »

dragonwriter wrote: post #241
olalonde wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are not supposed to. KYC is a legal requirement for money transmitters[0]. It does not apply to Bitcoin users. [0] Money transmission is the act of receiving currency from one party and transferring it to another party. Basically, middlemen in a transaction (e.g. banks).

If you are processing financial transactions (including something of “value that substitutes for currency”) between other people at their direction, you are a money transmitter. The whole point of both Bitcoin is decentralizing this function from banks to a network of miners, and a similar thing is done in Lightning with its nodes.

That's correct. In the case of Bitcoin, the thing that most closely resembles a "money transmitter" are miners but FinCEN ruled that they are not[0]. A sensible decision because otherwise, Bitcoin would have effectively been banned from the United States (or Bitcoin miners, at least).

[0] https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2014/01/31/fincen-declares-b...

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#243

Post by toolz »

jayd16 wrote: post #233
olalonde wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like someone who doesn't know the steps involved in opening a bank account (hint: many people can't), accepting online payments using a bank account (hint: hope you have deep pockets), using a bank for sending interbank/international payments (hint: might need to collect a page worth of information from your recipient. second hint: their bank might refuse to receive the payment), etc. Bonus steps: do all the a…

You know you're still supposed to collect all the same info for a BTC transaction, right? Just because it's easy doesn't mean it's not tax evasion.

Ignoring the fact it isn't tax evasion - just because it's against the law, doesn't mean it's unethical. Further, obeying laws can be (and often is) unethical. Not everything is on the level of requiring people to turn in jews, but there's plenty of room to argue that companies that are ill-equipped to protect your personal data should not be allowed, much less required, to collect your identifying information.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#244

Post by cardimart »

Aaronstotle wrote: post #222
TrapLord_Rhodo wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> its hard cap does not incentive actual use as a means of exchange. Why? Is that because it's has 'Scarcity'? People will pay more for it in the future? If that case is so soundly put why would you not buy as much btc as possible? Playing a bit of devils advocate here but wouldn't you say that it's volitility leads to more trading? Means of exchange need to be further defined in this crazy overfinancialized world we…

I'll use my own example, I purchased a month of a VPN service using BTC when it was ~11k, it's about $5 in fiat per month. If you believe BTC will only go up, I don't see why you would want to spend it if your money will be worth more if you wait. Regarding Volatility, yes it leads to a lot of trading, I mean means of exchange as purchasing everyday goods. The transaction history of BTC also adds regulatory hurdles.

So if every grocery was to be priced in BTC, you wouldn't eat? :)

Remember that the US was on the gold standard with a similar inflation profile to Bitcoin and consumers were consuming.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#245

Post by [deleted] »

joshstrange wrote: post #198
teekert wrote: post #5

A cool use of the Lightning network is the podcast 2.0 initative. Currently, as I listen to podcasts, I stream back satoshis (sats), value for value (I use Castamatic on iOS, fountain.fm is also an option on Android). You can also send messages with sats attached, called “boosts”. Creators can transparantly split the sats they receive over various goals (i.e. FOSS projects [opensats], or guests on shows). There are n…

I pay for 5 podcasts, I do it via Patreon, Memberful, and a custom (stripe-based) solution. I'm not really sure what problem needs to be solved in this space. I pay for 2 podcasts that I haven't listened to in months, I do it because I pay to support these creators. I don't need/want my listen history to directly correlate to sending money to hosts I like (nor do they, they'd much rather have the constant stream inst…

[deleted]

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#246

Post by mrguyorama »

teekert wrote: post #72
Grumbledour wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really dislike this whole initiative and much prefer the patreon model. One reason of course might be that i am listening to Jupiter Broadcast and Chris pushes this stuff hard, really annoying me with the constant talk about lightning and especially the boosts, which seem to take over half the show, because somehow he seems not to realize that the problem he has in getting regular supporters is the insane price he…

Chris indeed pushes it hard, I think indeed too hard, I agree. But it's reducing and moving to other shows (like OfficeHours.hair). To him this is the response to centralization of podcasting and I see that. As a member (I do 8$ a month, supporting 1 show but listen to all) I also see the imbalance in the attention that 2ct boosts get. It will go 1 of 2 ways I guess: 1) Boosts become the main income and keep getting…

If you want to see what "Boost" (donation) related content ends up looking like, look to popular twitch streamers. It's not great for those who want valuable and interesting content, and instead favors those who develop parasocial relationships and are addicted to getting their favorite personality to pretend to care about them.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#247

Post by _Algernon_ »

Hamuko wrote: post #47
once_inc wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think is being exchanged on the Lightning Network? LN transactions are simply 2-of-2 multisig transactions made on-chain, where both parties can change the balance amongst themselves, and where settlement is possible at any moment. Bitcoin isn't being used as money on-chain. Why is this controversial? Bitcoin is the equivalent of gold, which was the hardest form of money that is accepted worldwide, before…

> Bitcoin is the equivalent of gold That definitely wasn't the original goal of Bitcoin though.

Sometimes creators don't know what their creation is initially. surprised pikachu

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#248

Post by kordlessagain »

pessimizer wrote: post #220
kordlessagain wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you blame Lightning not for what it is, but what it enables? That doesn't make a lot of sense, especially given the creators built it to address the issues you raise here. With Lightning, micropayments for the Web can be a thing. Just because nobody has implemented it yet, doesn't mean it doesn't have a killer use case worth the cost of mining (which will decrease over a long period of time). Moving payments for A…

It doesn't make sense to blame Lightning for enabling Bitcoin, it only makes sense to praise Lightning for enabling Bitcoin?

Does it make any sense to judge something used a biased argument or ask leading questions? No, it doesn't.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#249

Post by adamrezich »

teekert wrote: post #35
TekMol wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you handle the tax implications of streaming sats? As far as I know, every payment with Bitcoin triggers a taxable event? Do you record a gazillion log entrys "Paid $0.0000145 for listening podcasts, Paid $0.000142 for listening podcasts ...", crunch all the numbers and then at the end of the year put that gigantic list into your tax declaration?

I'm not on the receiving end, but to me this seems like the law is behind reality. Micropayments are coming, perhaps using blockchain, perhaps not, probably in a number of different ways. I guess this is a good question for the hosts of the podcasts that use these features (Like Linux Unplugged, and other shows from Jupiter Broadcasting or the No Agenda show by Adam Curry and John Dvorak.) Perhaps this is not answere…

does No Agenda even accepts boosts? I was under the impression they didn't.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#250

Post by wahnfrieden »

hnthrow1010 wrote: post #223
wahnfrieden wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tired and copypasta-like impulsive response written in hysterics is why you're getting downvoted

That makes no sense. I wouldn't have to keep repeating myself if crypto people didn't also do the same thing. Also, please don't describe the act of disagreeing as being "in hysterics", that's bad discussion.

ok
Post reply on HN