Re: [Megathread] Bitcoin Layer 1 Privacy - concepts, ideas, research, discussion

Another feature, that can be considered both an advantage in some cases, and a disadvantage in others, is that MW transactions are multisig by sender AND receiver, and thus require them to interact to build the tx, just as is already the case for Lightning.

Interaction sounds pretty much like a no-go to me, to be honest.

Strange to hear you denounce Lightning just like that...

I think if you look at my post and topic history, it's obvious that I love Lightning.
But I just don't think interaction is going to be accepted / acceptable on layer 1. Even on Lightning, where it's technically impossible to do away with interaction, mechanisms have been developed to 'hide' it - LNURL, BOLT12 are just two examples. People just don't like this.. Wink

Quote from: tromp on Today at 07:20:19 AM

If Bitcoin is to achieve any sort of mainstream adoption, and actual use as a currency, then most users will eventually be far more familiar with the interactive nature of L2 transactions than the non-interactive nature of L1.

Honestly, being able to have things like static invoices (BOLT12) is a huge creature comfort. Or being able to receive payments directly into a cold storage wallet.
By the way; does interactivity in pure MimbleWimble / Grin mean that basically cold wallets don't exist? Or has someone come up with a smart solution?