reminder - LN is more private than monero

>>60601420 (OP)

Not buying your bags

>>60601420 (OP)
@grok is this true lighting network is more private than monero

it's extremely difficult to use lignthing in a privacy preserving way and it requires you to have your own channels. L1 blockspace prevents large numbers of people from doing that. the bitcoin network would choke if all the monero users abandoned monero and tried to maintain their own lightning channels. lightning sucks ass for many other reasons

>>60601420 (OP)
Reminder that Bitniggers will never post this on Dread because they know that the seasoned cybersecurity gurus there who actually know what they're talking about will methodically rip their flimsy "arguments" to pieces.

Monero faggots are just another form of altcoin shysters, nothing special

>>60602045
>Monero faggots are just another form of altcoin shysters, nothing special
Stay mad, brah.

>>60601420 (OP)
Bitcoin would be (more) private if it was affordable to use a new private key for every transaction

>>60601420 (OP)
Then why isn't any DNM using it?

>>60602041
>>60601896
https://moneroleaks.xyz/
https://njump.me/nevent1qqs8gpleyvw97s0h667rn3gy75cjsflxza5xs229ca75658taylsh3czyqsc8628tpyp6rcjf77e83tve2j9ulj5tnht34fgfrucy5l5j7uh2v2jaaq

>>60604144
are you the same twat on nostr who insinuated that sending your address to a counterparty leaks your address, along with ten other stupid things that have nothing to do with monero?
dishonest maxi lying scum eat my shit

>>60604216
i have no idea who or what you are talking about

>>60604221
your name is super testnet and you are the author of a website that spreads falsehoods about monero. you are the same person insisting on everyone switching to lightning when it doesn't even scale without custodians. go to hell

>>60604226
i'm not but also just rebut the arguments

>it doesnt scale
doesnt matter, most people prefer using custodians anyway

>>60601420 (OP)
Reminder - it isn't
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>60604277
> LN - transactions not persisted in a global immutable ledger, sent peer to peer only, onion routing, trampoline routing so that your immediate peer never knows if you were the terminal node
> XMR - transactions blasted out globally, available for the rest of time to be data mined by blockchain analytics firms, ring signatures vulnerable to attack

cool dude

>>60604296
Cool
Show me these ring sig attacks
And don't share that shit from 2018 that never de-anon'd a single address

>>60601454
No, the Lightning Network is not more private than Monero. Monero is designed with privacy as a core feature, using techniques like ring signatures, stealth addresses, and RingCT to obscure sender, receiver, and transaction amounts by default. Every transaction on Monero’s blockchain is private, making it nearly impossible to trace without specific view keys.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero)

The Lightning Network, a layer-2 solution for Bitcoin, improves privacy over Bitcoin’s transparent blockchain by conducting transactions off-chain through payment channels. Only channel opening and closing transactions appear on-chain, and Lightning uses onion routing to obscure payment paths. However, privacy depends on factors like node trustworthiness, as intermediate nodes can potentially log data or correlate transactions. If a node is compromised or run by a malicious entity (e.g., blockchain analysis firms), privacy can be undermined. Additionally, channel closures can leak information via on-chain transactions, and receivers must share invoice details, risking de-anonymization.

Monero’s base layer is inherently private, battle-tested since 2016 on darknet markets with no major vulnerabilities, whereas Lightning’s privacy is optional, complex to maintain, and relies on a transparent base layer, making it less robust. Recent posts on X echo this, emphasizing Monero’s superior privacy due to its default, on-chain anonymity compared to Lightning’s potential for routing leaks and third-party reliance.

>>60604314
https://moneroleaks.xyz/ > Case studies, List of attacks

>>60601420 (OP)
that depends entirely upon the details of the channel you are using but in theory you should be correct.

>>60602045
I think Monero is good because it keeps the degenerate druggies off of Bitcoin

>>60601420 (OP)
LN is trash, kys OP. Anyone who actually gives a shit about bitcorn wants to increase the blocksize.

>>60604296
it is extremely difficult to set up your lightning installation to optimize privacy and there is not enough room on L1 for everyone to use lightning like that anyway. if you use a custodian instead you don't get all of those privacy guarantees.
you can't even make large payments with lightning unless you prepare your setup beforehand to rig the live demonstration. it's not feasible in the wild.
you are simply never going to see a world where all the monero people switch to lightning. it cannot be mass adopted the way you envision it and people explained why it cannot work many times over. lightning is terrible and belongs in the garbage

>>60604334
your case studies section conflates opsec mistakes and KYC exchanges performing timing correlations with "tracing monero." they have nothing to do with monero

>>60604334
>https://moneroleaks.xyz/ > Case studies, List of attacks
LMAO talk about grasping at straws. Monero doesn't protect you from abysmal OpSec, you fucktard, nothing does.

Anyway, if LN is legitimately a better option than XMR than there's no reason not to implement it on darknet markets. Which, as seen, simply is not going to happen. Bitniggers just cannot accept that their half-assed privacy solutions have all been rejected as unsatisfactory.

>>60604334
>and don't share that shit from 2018 that never de-anon'd a single address
You had one job

>>60601420 (OP)
delusional or tech illiterate
state channels have the worst privacy ever
even worse than base layer

>>60604412
it doesn't tho

>>60604418
the blocksize HAS increased
4x