if you speak to rath_ he will tell you his LN wallet does not have privacy, his wallet announces his channel balance changes to a central DNS/explorer/whole network so that everyone can see whats available to make routes.
Oh, wow. Slow down for a moment. I have never said that.
You should take a look at at least one paper describing the probing attack on the Lightning Network.
LN nodes gossip about channels available for routing and their total capacities. To issue a (multi-hop) payment, the sender creates a route based on its local knowledge of the graph. As local channel balances are not public, payments often fail due to insufficient balance at an intermediary hop. In that case, the payment is attempted along multiple routes until it succeeds. This constitutes a privacy-efficiency tradeoff: hidden balances improve privacy but hinder routing efficiency.
As for the "central DNS", you are ignoring the fact that nodes use DNS bootstrapping (
just like Bitcoin nodes) to discover peers. Lightning nodes talk not only to their channel partners but also to other participants of the network. You fail to acknowledge that even though you can easily check it on your own by either setting up your own node or running a non-custodial wallet like Electrum.
oh and rath_ thinks even if i set my C to be private, he can still see
A-B-C-D-E
\
W-X-Y-Z
all because HIS wallet defaults and forces his channels to be public so he does not understand that privacy was and is possible.
Yes, I could still see WX, XY and YZ channels as you assume that they are public.
and instead can build routes without testing them. the flaw of this convenience of saving a few hundred bytes of data. is ofcourse lack of privacy, and also the reason he had a 70% fail rate for payments because he wasnt testing routes before trying to push payments
There is no other way to test if the payment will go through other than actually send it. You fail to prove which "private message" in our opinion is actually supposed to do that.