{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1dmpy2z9v4nr2np0zjs5he433zphdjy8qkxa4xh04xc9d58n0yjes6y809s","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1dmpy2z9v4nr2np0zjs5he433zphdjy8qkxa4xh04xc9d58n0yjes6y809s","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-10-13\n📝 Original message:\u003e - Bitrefill's on-chain payments for gift cards and phone top-ups\n\nBitrefill already supports lightning, so for them it would be easy to\nsolve by displaying the lightning transfer by default and only show\nthe on-chain payment as a fallback. Currently the on-chain payment at\nBitrefill and other similar providers is really a drop-down where you\nselect your wallet and then they display a tutorial to you on how to\ncreate the on-chain transaction (fee rate, RBF flag, etc). I don't\nhave insights into Bitrefill, but one might suspect that encouraging a\nlightning payment might be a win-win situation for them and their\nusers.\n\nIt would be interesting to know if there are any obstacles that\nBitrefill and other services face, or if they don't agree that\nlightning is an improvement over accepting unconfirmed on-chain\ntransactions from untrusted parties.\n\n\u003e - Many bitcoin ATMs' on-chain deposits for selling bitcoin for cash (at least\n\nI haven't tried them yet, but I suspect they could benefit in a\nsimilar by showing lightning transfers more prominently. Moreover, any\nUX improvement they can offer to users that intentionally or\naccidentally selected RBF opt-in, will also benefit users once fullrbf\nis widespread. To give an example, ATMs could immediately give out a\nvoucher for the cash amount that can be redeemed as soon as the\ntransaction is confirmed on-chain, to allow (untrusted) users to leave\nthe ATM and go for a walk in the meantime.\n\n\u003e With full-RBF, wallets should make it extremely clear to users that unconfirmed\n\u003e funds are not theirs (yet). Otherwise, protocol-unaware users that are\n\u003e transacting on-chain with untrusted parties can be easily scammed if they don't\n\u003e know they have to wait for a confirmation. Eg. in Argentina, it's pretty common\n\u003e to meet someone in person to buy bitcoin P2P for cash, even for newcomers.\n\nThis is easy to solve, because a wallet can simply display all\nunconfirmed transactions as if they signalled for RBF. Your suggested\nsolution to \"activate\" fullrbf at a specific block height might be\ncounter productive, because educating users that unconfirmed\ntransactions are unsafe takes longer than a single block. So the\nearlier users are educated that unconfirmed transactions from\nuntrusted parties are unsafe, the better.\n\n\u003e # Impact at Muun\n\u003e\n\u003e Work to transition Muun from using zero-conf submarine swaps to using payment\n\u003e channels is ongoing, but we are still several months away from being production\n\u003e ready. This means we would have to turn off outgoing lightning payments for\n\u003e +100k monthly active users, which is a good chunk of all users making\n\u003e non-custodial lightning payments today.\n\nIt would be unfortunate for those users, but I think that the risk\nexists today. Relay of fullrbf transactions works reasonable well\nalready, unless you get unlucky with your selected peers. The only\nmissing piece is a few percent of hashrate that will accept fullrbf\nreplacement transactions. While this will certainly happen if a\nBitcoin Core release ships with the flag *on* by default, it still may\nhappen at any time even if Bitcoin Core doesn't ship with the flag at\nall.\n\nBest,\ncndm1"}