{ "episodeId": "SLP531", "speakers": { "stephan": { "name": "Stephan Livera", "role": "host", "tag": "STEPHAN" }, "severin_buhler_from_synonym": { "name": "Severin Buhler from Synonym", "role": "guest", "tag": "SEVERIN" } }, "segments": [ { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:00", "start": 0.12, "text": "There is so much technological research and progress in, in the making that, like, two years ago, I didn't know how to scale Lightning, but there's so m-- have been so much happening in the last two years, it's great, and it's gonna still happen in the next two years, I'm optimistic." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "00:30", "start": 30.03, "text": "Hi everyone and welcome to the Stefan Livera podcast, the show about Bitcoin and Austrian economics brought to you by Swan dot com. Today we're talking about Lightning LSPs and more with Severin Buhler from Synonym. So first off, Severin, welcome to the show." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:47", "start": 46.83, "text": "Hey, Stefan, nice to be here." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "00:50", "start": 49.63, "text": "Great. And so yeah, thank you for joining me, and, we're gonna get into a lot of interesting stuff, but, yeah, just, you know, take a minute, just give us a bit of your background for people who don't know you." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:00", "start": 60.18, "text": "Yeah, sure. So, I'm Severin, I work at Synonym, and I'm building the LSP block tank there. And, I'm a digital nomad into Bitcoin now since 2016, but only actively started to work on Bitcoin in, 2020 basically, so Three years now basically, and, yeah, now back in nice Switzerland, we have a very snowy week. freezing outside, but it's good, it's nice to Be back here." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "01:34", "start": 93.56, "text": "Great. And so you mentioned LSPs, I think this is a big topic that we're going to get into today, and working on the LSP spec. So I guess just to help define terms for people who aren't familiar, w- What is an LSP and what are maybe some of the different kinds of LSPs?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:52", "start": 112.0, "text": "Yeah, sure. So LSP, some people say it's a Lightning service provider, other people are talking about a liquidity service provider. The basic definition is it is your gateway to the Lightning network If you are, non-custodial Lightning wallet user, you somehow need, to get Lightning channels and to receive funds and also to send funds. And to get that, you need a partner with, Bitcoin that puts funds into these Lightning channels, and the LSP will do that for you. It will basically do everything for you so you can just onboard to the Lightning network without any friction. And, just start transacting. It's, yeah, so simple." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "02:43", "start": 162.73, "text": "Great. And so I think for a lot of users, if you're a more casual user, maybe you don't really need to think about some of this stuff. Like it's-- the idea is it's, it's in the background of your application and it's kind of managed for you. But some of this stuff will be interesting and relevant for people who are developers, builders, you know, and people who want to know a bit more about exactly what's happening under the hood per se. And so you have been working On the LSP specifications with a bunch of other people, and so this is maybe something might be interesting to get further into. So we've explained what an LSP is, what's the point of these LSP specifications? What are they hoping to achieve with that?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "03:25", "start": 204.54, "text": "Yeah, sure. So The LSP specification is a collection of APIs, APIs, standardized APIs that every wallet can talk to and integrate, and the goal is that we can abstract away like the LSP and basically create a market of LSPs. And as a wallet provider, you can just choose whatever LSP you want and, talk to these LSPs in the standardized way And, yeah, make everything happen, because the problem right now of today is every wallet, say Breeze, Bitkit, or Phoenix, they have their one single LSP behind. They have the, they have their own way of communicating with this LSP, and you're kind of locked in there. Kind of like, maybe a good comparison is a sim-locked phone. You can, you have this LSP, and if you want- If you want to, switch the LSP, you can't just do it. You need to also switch the app. So if I really like the Breeze UI or the Bitkit UI, I need to switch the whole app and move all my funds over, to accomplish the switching of the LSP. And we want to make this better, we want to create an LSP market there, and, we want to make the experience for the user way better. This is like has multiple advantages. For, BitKit, at the moment that we can't-- the Blocktank LSP, the one I'm working on, we don't serve US users from a legal point of view, and if we have an LSP market where, where the user can just decide which LSP to take, we can al-- like, we can also serve US users above, BitKit can also be used with, a US LSP that's just not our own. And, yeah, there's a lot of more advantages that I can get into." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "05:29", "start": 329.3, "text": "Gotcha, yeah. So at a high level, it's a way to make it programmatically easy for a Lightning wallet to plug into multiple different LSPs. And I guess Some of the Lightning wallets and applications that exist today, they're at varying levels in terms of allowing you to do this. So for example, with Breeze, I believe you can have channels that aren't just with the Breeze LSP, but it's kind of more technical and it's not really something that most users would use. In an LSP spec world, it would be a lot easier for people to do that, and of course, with BitKit or with, you know, potentially with Phoenix or Blixt or various other Zeus and Mutiny and all the other Lightning apps that are out there Summarizing some of the benefits, as you said, it may allow more fine-grained control in terms of which LSPs serve which users from which jurisdiction, so that's a legal aspect. There might be an angle of privacy that you might want to have multiple LSPs, like you might have your Lightning wallet, but it actually connects out to multiple LSPs, giving you maybe some privacy benefit. Maybe there's also an element of reliability there too, because maybe if you've got multiple LSPs, maybe if one LSP is down, but the other one isn't, or the other Another LSP is more well connected, and maybe it's also an angle of competition on fees. So maybe one particular LSP is charging you zero point five percent fee, and another one is charging you zero point four percent fee. So there's a fee competition aspect there also. Do you see any other elements there that, that they are-- I guess let me put this into a question. What ways are LSPs going to compete?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "07:03", "start": 423.37, "text": "Yeah, it's basically you create a market of LSPs, and we know what some elements there are. We're gonna compete with, as you said, like reliability, fees is one hundred percent one thing, l-like, yeah, cheap liquidity and all these things, and there will be ways they will compete we don't know yet of, as of today. That's just what we think, what we already know. At the end, competition creates good ser- should create good services, especially competition in such an easy way with, standardized API, and, yeah, that's the goal. It's, To have a good LSP marketplace. Also in the future, we'll probably see that LSPs might get regulated or some will get regulated at some point, and I think there is al-- there's also gonna be a market competition between, regulated and non-regulated LSPs. I hope for example- So let's talk a little bit" }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "08:01", "start": 481.17, "text": "about that. What do you think it would look like if there are some LSPs who are regulated? For example, let's say there's an LSP serves in the US and, you know, an LSP who set up- Outside of, you know, US, whether that's in El Salvador or somewhere else, what do you think that would look like?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "08:15", "start": 495.46, "text": "Good question. I think at some point, coun- like specific countries might regulate LSPs. I really hope not so, I always hope we-- and there is always an angle of, \"I just use an El Salvadorian LSP, and then it's no issue anymore.\" But who knows? Maybe the start, the, the US will start regulating their, LSPs. And want, their LPs to follow some, rules, but I really hope, don't hope so, but we'll see what the future brings." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "08:49", "start": 529.44, "text": "Of course, yeah. And so I can understand where, of course, I'm, I'm anti this regulation as well myself, but I could, I could see a scenario where this kind of thing happens, where maybe some compliance department in a bank that serves a, a particular Bitcoin business says, \"We don't want to serve you unless you are blocking OFAC-sanctioned transactions somehow.\" But that doesn't really exist in the same way that it does on chain because it's in Lightning, then it's more like, would you have to try to censor payments to particular node public keys or, it becomes very challenging? Yeah," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "09:22", "start": 561.72, "text": "even that doesn't work because as soon as we have route blinding, both sender and receiver are completely anonymous, and this, yeah, then you have no way to censor. So I'm actually more optimistic with, Lightning, Lightning being censored. the way it's gonna be censored, it might- My opinion is, you are only allowed to open a channel with somebody that you know and that actually behaves. there you also know the node ID, and you could probably censor a node, node ID, so you're not allowed to open a channel to this node ID. but that's not so easy to do, like, it creates a lot of overhead and bureaucracy, for, LSP node operators, and also it's not so easy to do From a regulation point of view. So, yeah, I still hope for the best for the Lightning Network, let's say, like this. And" }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "10:15", "start": 615.46, "text": "even there, like, it's kind of parallel to how certain Bitcoin addresses would be listed on the OFAC censorship list, but then people can, create, generate new addresses. So in the Lightning context, it could also be a similar kind of whack-a-mole game of people would just shut down that node and spin up a new node, and, you know, now, yes, there's a cost to that. You can't just like instantly But fundamentally, yeah, people could just shut down a Lightning. Imagine even if a Lightning node pub key is added to some kind of censorship list, they could shut that down, go to another jurisdiction, set up a new one, and they're back up and running. And so, yeah, it's kind of a complicated question. I guess I, I wouldn't" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "10:59", "start": 659.37, "text": "be surprised if a lot of capital would end up in El Salvador if they have good regulations, they, secure or guarantee the security of the capital and yeah, then every, everything would flock to El Salvador." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "11:14", "start": 673.78, "text": "Yeah, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there and, you know, imagine in this next, you know, bull run, bull cycle, more nations kind of copy the lead of El Salvador. Maybe there'll be other nations who are competing and vying for the same, you know, market in terms of being Open to Bitcoin and Bitcoin businesses. So, yeah, it'll be interesting to see what happens there. I guess while we're on this topic, might be interesting just to kind of get your thoughts on what happened recently with Wallet of Satoshi. Now, this is a custodial application, coming out of Australia, and they recently made the announcement that, that, that they don't want to serve US users. And so they've, now, they are allowing them to off-board and saying, \"Hey, take your coins off.\" and so I, you know, I don't have insight into that, but I, my speculation would be that this is based on, not, you know, government regulation in the US and KYC and AML and sanctions laws. And so I'm curious if you have any reaction on that, whether you think that is a trend that will continue or do you think maybe that's more restricted to the US case?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "12:22", "start": 742.16, "text": "it's gonna be very hard to do custodial, Lightning or custodial Bitcoin without KYC at the end. The US has a lot of power, to pressure other countries into doing what they want, especially when it comes to money. me as a Swiss, we saw this with the Swiss bank in the two thousand and eight crisis, where at some point I had to go down to a bank, to my bank here in the town, and sign that I'm not a Affiliated with any US, citizen or US resident, and I don't have money of for them on my bank account, and that's in Switzerland. so the US has a lot of power with SWIFT and, with their banking system, and I believe custodial lightning will be very hard to do, KYC free, maybe somewhere in Russia or who knows, that is far apart from the Western influence. But yeah, and at the end, it's either be non-custodial Or KYC custodial, but KYC, I'm not so much against KYC custodial. Like, what do I care my pocket money where I pay with my coffee? I personally don't care that much. It's just for somebody that is, more exposed, for example, if you're very rich and you're, more in this power influence sphere, it would be better to have everything non-custodial. But then this goes to the question, how do we scale Bitcoin better? How do we- We scale lightning, which pro-- we will probably talk also here in a second." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "13:57", "start": 836.68, "text": "Yeah, well, I, you know what, we should talk about that a little bit. So there are questions being raised around, okay, exactly how many people could Bitcoin and Lightning scale to today in a non-custodial way? It's, it's a topic of debate" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "14:11", "start": 850.99, "text": "So, okay, you can do all the numbers. You have a certain amount of block space, you need to onboard new users, you need an on-chain transaction, sometimes they need to close this transaction, close this channel, maybe you do a swap once or twice a year. There's a lot of things, and with this limited amount of block space, you can maybe, so in the ideal, ideal scenario, you can maybe do one hundred million a year to onboard on Lightning. in a more realistic scenario, I would say twenty million something, and it gets more crowded with time. So you have a fixed limit, of people that you can onboard to Lightning. It's not gonna be enough for the whole planet. Definitely. Yeah. And The how this will show itself is with rising on-chain fees. So the global South will be priced out earlier, and then maybe in the US and in the richer parts of Europe, we will feel this later, but we definitely have a problem there. And now, how do we, solve this? We somehow need to scale Lightning, and there are different methods to do that. I personally think we can probably increase the block size By times two, times four, that's one way, like we had a lot of growth in, SSD storage space. Like you can get storage way cheaper. but times two, times four won't bring us to the numbers that we need. We'll also need to look at alternative methods of scaling. one interesting, example is ARK from BURAC. we have channel factories that just recently in the last month there were a lot of interesting people papers coming out that show how to make it better based on the original idea from Christian Decker and then there's also some interesting methods, bitVM who might turn out we can do something in a one to N, case and do some scaling there. There's a lot of things going on in the last year or two which are very interesting. I don't think we should rush the scaling debate there." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "16:29", "start": 988.69, "text": "Right. And so So yeah, just to summarize a few things, I think t-there's a lot of discussion about different pathways, like you're saying, whether that's to have CTV, Check Template Verify, and other related ideas that may help us sort of batching and get more for less, and so maybe we can have this kind of multi-party channel construction idea, LN symmetry with any prevout, and some of these other ideas, people are talking about some of these ideas, and maybe in the future there, there would be enough support to get something like CTV or APO and other related ideas. I, I'm not sure what'll happen with block sizes. I think it's likely that we won't get a block size increase, but, you know, I guess it's, it's possible, but I think it's unlikely. Comprehensus topic. Yeah, of course. And obviously it's gonna redo the whole twenty seventeen debate all over again, and maybe that's kind of- People aren't gonna be open to have that conversation at least for another ten, fifteen years, but I think if we had to sort of ballpark estimate kind of the, on the numbers today with the technology we have today without a soft fork Do you think it's fair to say somewhere between ten to one hundred million people can use Bitcoin and Lightning today, and that if we want to get higher than that, that's where we might need Check Tempel Verify or something, to sort of go above that in terms of self-custodial users? Would you say that's a fair number, roughly?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "17:46", "start": 1066.5, "text": "Yeah, I would say close to one hundred million if we onboard them relatively slow. If you want to have one hundred million tomorrow, it's an issue." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "17:56", "start": 1076.15, "text": "Yeah, right. And then I guess the question, and again, this is kind of like a \"how long is a piece of string?\" question, because it all-- there's so many different factors that could change and move here. But do you believe that if we were to get some of these different technologies, that that would take us fully to eight billion, or maybe it's more like it takes us to like maybe one more order of magnitude, like maybe eight hundred, you know, a, a billion people, something like that?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "18:25", "start": 1105.34, "text": "Yeah, I believe every-- So we will not have this one scaling solution that will bring us to exactly eight billion. We will have a little sprinkle of this, a little sprinkle of this, and we will slowly be able to increase the, the amount of people, on the blockchain, and, that will hopefully bring-- I hope in five years we'll be able to do one, one billion. That would be really nice. And then we'll see. Maybe there's so much technological research and progress in, in the making that Like a two years ago, I didn't know how to scale Lightning, but there's so m- have been so much happening in the last two years, it's great, and it's gonna still happen in the next two years, I'm optimistic." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "19:18", "start": 1158.04, "text": "Right. And so I think That will also turn on how many people are comfortable with, let's say, having a soft fork to i-introduce something like CTV or APO and some of these ideas. Do you see it as there would be enough support, or, you know, people are gonna build up enough support for that kind of thing? do you see any strong sectors of Bitcoin's ecosystem who would be resistant against that?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "19:45", "start": 1185.43, "text": "I mean, there's definitely resistance to any on-chain change, it's like, it's obvious. We will need a big discussion, and this discussion, in my opinion, will happen in this next bull market, because in the next bull market, fees will go insane. We already see it right now. We are not even in a bull market yet, and the fees are relatively high from time to time. We're talking, what, what did we see recently? Two hundred and fifty satoshis per byte or something?" }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "20:14", "start": 1214.11, "text": "Yeah. Something in the That range, and as I, as we speak now, it's around fifty-four sats per vbyte, or in fiat terms, just under three dollars to get next block confirmation, just for context." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "20:25", "start": 1224.62, "text": "Yes. And if we use this calculation, if we will create an, a channel right now, it's, let's say it's five dollars per channel to create one, because the, the transaction is a little bit bigger. Yep. let's do two hundred and fifty vbytes, two hundred and fifty satoshi per vbyte. That times five, that's twenty five bucks for an, channel. That's already for most people, it's a decent amount of money if you just have your, non-custodial wallet on your phone here. And let's say we do a five hundred Satoshi per byte, then it's fifty bucks. And that's only opening a channel, and you also need a transaction to close the channel at some point, so you can basically double this amount. So you see that channel opening and channel closes in the Lightning Network is gonna be r-pretty much expensive in this bull market, and this will one hundred percent trigger, discussion about Lightning's, Lightning and Bitcoin's sp-scaling." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "21:31", "start": 1290.92, "text": "Back to the show in a moment. If you are concerned about where things are going monetarily over at swan dot com, you can buy Bitcoin and you can make it in an easy way because with swan dot com or using the swan bitcoin app or and- Android applications, you can set up an automatic recurring purchase plan with Bitcoin. So many of us who have been in the Bitcoin world for some time, we regularly accumulate Bitcoin, whether that's buying it, mining it, or earning it. So over at Swan, it's easy for you to regularly accumulate some Bitcoin, whether that's a certain amount every week or every month, you can set it up on certain thresholds that you are comfortable with, and when you are accumulating that Bitcoin, what you also wanna do is do what Swan makes it easy for you to do, which is to withdraw to your own self-cust Free automated withdrawals to your own Bitcoin wallet. Swan also makes a range of educational material available and has other services that you might be interested in. In terms of education, you should also check out a Welcome to Bitcoin course, which I helped script also, so you can find that over at swan dot com slash welcome. And now back to the show. Right. A-and so the other question, obviously we're talking about LSPs as well, is there batching that can occur at an LSP level? So for example, the LSP might be able to batch on their side, let's say there's, you know, a hundred new users who are all coming on board Can the LSP batch some of those things into one transaction at the LSP level and then arguably share some of those savings, those cost batching savings amongst the users?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "23:05", "start": 1385.25, "text": "Yeah. it is to a limited amount. So the biggest problem right now with batching is all the users that do the batch basically need to be online at the same time. It gets Very difficult if you want to do a batch with, turbo channel. So a cha- turbo channel is a channel that is available instantly to you and can start transacting without the block confirmation. And these turbo channels are even more tricky to, Batch. There are thoughts and, ways to improve this, but this would require a protocol change. You basically want to swap out the transaction, For this turbo channel and replace it with the batched, transaction at a certain timing point, point in time. so it is possible, but we just need to put some more love into these techniques. and yeah, it will save some, let's say it will save fifty percent maybe, if you're lucky, which is good, but it doesn't bring us to a billion, unfortunately. Bill- Yeah," }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "24:17", "start": 1456.65, "text": "of course. Yeah, but it would, it'll get us a little bit Yeah. And it may be a, a, a ca-a case where some users, in the same way that when you're doing a withdrawal from an exchange now, now of course, Swan has free withdrawals, but there are other exchanges where maybe you can set your fee rate and you can sort of say, \"I want it now, and I'm willing to pay more,\" or \"I'm willing to wait.\" And so maybe it'll be a similar case with LSP setup where maybe people say, \"Hey, I'm willing to wait, and you can batch my channel open, and so I can have Is this thing and how easy is it for new users? Because when a new user is coming on, they don't have a concept of like, what is inbound liquidity, what is a channel, you know, obviously that's, that's a bit, more challenging. But I think it's fair to say if you were earning and spending With Bitcoin and like your whole salary was coming in over Lightning, then maybe it's worth your while, right? Like maybe it, it is worth your while. Like let's say you're earning, you know, you're an average person earning in the Western world And this person in the Western world might be earning forty K per year, eighty K per year, depending where they are, and for them, a monthly pay might be, you know, at least a few thousand dollars. And so would it be worthwhile for them to have even a twenty-five dollar open channel open fee, but they're gonna actually use it, like they're actually gonna earn on that and spend out of that, and only periodically they might need to splice or kind of go to chain maybe once a month month, something like that. Like in that context, we could support more users, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "25:53", "start": 1553.45, "text": "Yeah, yeah, one hundred percent. It's-- So the channel cost that you have consists of two things. It consists of first on-chain costs to actually create a transaction, but second, it also consists of liquidity costs that the LSP provides to you. And there it's very hard to guess what the liquidity costs are of Bitcoin are gonna be in the future. it, let's say you have a one thousand dollar channel, if you have one percent liquidity co— let's say one percent liquidity cost per quarter, That would make, one percent is ten bucks per quarter on top, and that's a re- that's a bit of different costs because it's recurring over time. Right. If you just do a create a lightning channel, on chain, it's open transaction, you can have it for ten years, whatever, no issue, but with this liquidity cost, it's a little bit more tricky. So just opening a big channel towards you that, gives you a lot of inbound liquidity you can just keep filling up and filling up is a good thing for OnChain, but it will ha-- you will have the costs of the liquidity that the LSP needs to provide. So we're in a bit of a pickle there, but we'll figure this out as well at some point." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "27:18", "start": 1638.45, "text": "And even there, it turns on what is exactly the business model, right? At some LSP These may take a model where they charge you on the outgoing fee, and others may treat it more like a channel rental fee, right? This kind of idea of whether you spend out of this channel or not, I need to charge you whatever it is, ten dollars a month, twenty dollars a month, whatever it is, and then at that point, it's more like, it's a cost of doing business, right? It's a cost of being able to access Lightning for that user, because maybe he earns on Lightning and can spend out of Lightning, but other users maybe they're more casual and Sending out of Lightning that much, so for them, they just kind of only keep a small amount there in Lightning and just keep most of it, most of their savings is on chain in a hardware wallet, multisig, etcetera, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "28:03", "start": 1683.21, "text": "Yeah, exactly. I'm still thinking about this example where if you are a merchant, you choose your wallet size. Let's say, okay, let's make an example. I'm a restaurant owner. And I get twenty bucks, like I get, twenty bucks transactions the whole night, and my revenue is, I don't know, two thousand bucks for an evening. And I, what I want to do as a, as a restaurant owner, I want to choose a channel size, wallet size, yeah, of maybe two thousand bucks or three, four thousand bucks, so I can do all the revenue, for an evening in this wallet, right," }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "28:42", "start": 1722.5, "text": "inside that one, yeah, without having to con- Continually add to the channel size, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "28:47", "start": 1727.42, "text": "Yes, and that's the whole controversy that, or controversy, the whole discussion we have with Phoenix right now, where they open, a new channel relatively quickly because they're, the gap, like the inbound liquidity, they don't give a lot there. yeah, let's see how it, the UX will evolve in, these, Lightning wallets." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "29:11", "start": 1751.35, "text": "Right, and part of it, I think, is choosing the right tool for the job, right? Because if you are a merchant, maybe, at least Phoenix as it currently is, I think that they might try innovating and doing something new too. But as it currently is, I wouldn't tell a merchant You know, if you are gonna be mostly receiving and not spending out, it might not be the right choice for you. Maybe something else is a better choice for you to get proper channels or set up your own node or use a merchant solution so that way you're getting a big enough inbound channel and I think Phoenix would make more sense for the user who is spending. So then, if you're earning and spending out of it, you'll sort of naturally have inbound because every time you spend out of that channel, you've got some inbound capacity. So I think maybe that's one angle to this. But yeah, this did recently come up. So I think, as you were saying, so I think Brad Mills recently tweeted this out, and there were people who were sort of- Seemingly up in arms about this, and whereas I was saying, \"No, I think it's just a matter of choosing the right tool for the job,\" because he was, in his case, he w-- I think he was trying to onboard somebody to Lightning, and in his mind, he was saying, \"Yeah, look, Phoenix non-custodial, get someone onto that.\" But he didn't also think through, you know, he didn't understand that point at that time that this user was just gonna be continually receiving, and therefore every time they're gonna have to hit the chain A-a-and it just doesn't, it wasn't very practical, and it would have been more practical if you'd had one big inbound channel that which you can receive on, and so that would be a different context. But I know you guys with Bitkit have a slightly different model where you can actually select a larger inbound. Now you pay for that, but you can have a larger inbound. So I guess different models, different products, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "31:01", "start": 1860.6, "text": "Exactly. We just need to iterate a little bit more on the UI UX part and- Then we can solve this. It's not, it's not rocket science there." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "31:09", "start": 1869.48, "text": "Right. And so, so we've been talking a little bit about, I guess, from the user perspective, like these are the fees that they're gonna pay. What about from the LSP side? Because from the LSP side, you're thinking, you, I need to lock up a certain amount of capital with that customer, with the end user of that LSP, and you need to obviously make back enough either on kind of channel rental fees, I guess, I don't know the right term for that, I And then transaction fees, right? Because if they're transacting a lot and you can charge them on that, then, you know, that's a model. Or the other side is the channel rental side of it." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "31:45", "start": 1905.2, "text": "Yeah. the cost equation on the LSP side is relatively clear. It is on-chain fees and it is liquidity costs and your operational costs, whatever you wanna put on top. there are multiple ways, so so far there are multiple ways that like emerged how to, to, to get the money back from the user. one way is the zero fee routing way, as you remember a year ago. Yeah. what he innovated on was he charged All the fees at the beginning when you purchase the channel or the user purchase the channel, and then put all the fees to zero, all the, the routing fees to zero, and this was very attractive from an, for example, from an exchange point, point of view or from a business point of view. It's, you can compare this to your mobile phone subscription, you pay once and can use it as much as you want. And then there is the other way, that, you'll have mobile wallets are using right now, is they subsidize the channel opening a bit, and then you pay transaction fees, like routing fees on each, transaction. And at the end, I believe it's gonna be a mix. It's, it's, we're even thinking about stuff like if the user transacts, enough Then we will lower the routing fee to zero, and then you just have a fee budget for, or like a, a budget, an internal budget, that, covers the channel fees, everything, and over time, and then you can also, extend the lease on the channel. That would be a very great idea. But, that's far in the future." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "33:39", "start": 2018.79, "text": "Gotcha. Okay, yeah, it's, and I think it's just a very nascent space because right now, it's just still, it's still so early in terms of how many people are really day-to-day users of Lightning. Now, I, I am a day-to-day user myself, but, you know, it's still, it's still a while before we see like meaningful like numbers of users who are actually day-to-day users of Lightning, so I, I guess let's talk a little bit out, sort of zooming out and just looking at Lightning experience more broadly, what would you say it's like? For a newer user right now, like, do you think it's like we've reached a point where, you know, a new user can onboard to this thing or do they, do they still need to be a little bit savvy with Lightning and Bitcoin?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "34:25", "start": 2064.8, "text": "It, if you're lucky and you choose the right wallet, I believe it works pretty decently. You don't have these experiences anymore like you had two, three years ago where you send a payment and it takes like twenty seconds until this payment arrived. I, I run Alan Router, which is a service that does, s-payment speed measurements in the Lightning network, and I did, a blog post one and a half years ago and measured, the, the payment speed in the Lightning network to a lot of different nodes And it was really slow from time to time, like these tornodes that were very common, two years ago, they really slowed down the network, and a lot of these things got better I believe there are less Tor nodes in the network now. I believe, LSPs choose their, channel partners more wisely And also people moved over to the better wallets, and that helped a lot. And from a user point of view, the network works quite okay. You still have some failure rates with, payment failed or, you have still the occasional very slow payment, so that's good. But if you look at it from a merchant point of view, I'm still I'm still relatively skeptical that the experience is good, because from a merchant point of view," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "36:12", "start": 2171.91, "text": "a lot of users come to you with all their different wallets, sometimes with home setups and everything, and as a merchant, if you create an invoice and the user tries to pay and it doesn't work, it's really hard to figure out like, why is it not working? Is it the Lightning Network? Is it me? Is it the user that just pay tried to? To paint me, it's this insecurity i-in this process which is very anxiety-inducing. I just saw an, payment, Phoenix to an El Salvadorian hotel. There, there was a video going around on Twitter two weeks ago. And it was a great video. It, the guy paid like one thousand two hundred bucks, like USD or so, really a high amount. Phoenix showed the, the payment confirmation within two seconds. But the hotel owner, until he saw the payment confirmation, it took like ten seconds or so, and these are like the, the, the, the anxiety-inducing seconds where like, \"Hey, I sent the payment, but it looks like it didn't arrive on yours. What's going on?\" And like everybody gets nervous. And to-- it would be re-really good if we can make this flawless, because it would improve the user experience so much." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "37:36", "start": 2256.04, "text": "Yeah, and in fairness, I mean, there are times, like I would say when you are comparing with fiat credit cards and fiat debit cards, there's sometimes where it will take long, it might take ten seconds, but maybe it might happen less often than today with Lightning. depend-- again, depending on which wallet, which service you're using, I think if you're talking about using the sort of very High reliability wallets, something like a Phoenix, as an example, and you're paying into some of the ver-more re-reliable or well-known merchant providers, then it tends to be very, very good because they've got, maybe they even have direct channels or they just have very good liquidity, a-and sort of high-level infrastructure, but then in other cases where maybe the guy has DIY channels, maybe there's less, you know, likelihood there that, Everything just happens in a very reliable way. So I'm curious then, I guess the next question would be, do you believe that it can be improved or do you think that there are some fundamental hurdles here?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "38:41", "start": 2320.62, "text": "No, it can one hundred percent be improved. you can improve the payment, the, the, the route finding algorithms, you can improve the apps in itself, so everything gets more, gets better basically. there are some bugs, every wallet has some bugs at the moment, just sometimes it doesn't work unfortunately. But these are just little things that we need to work on a little bit more, and, at the end Lightning, we will have a good payment experience. I'm one hundred percent convinced about that." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "39:16", "start": 2356.07, "text": "Yeah. And so just to give people, I don't know if you have any numbers or even just ballpark, can you give people some ballpark numbers on things like payment reliability or payment timing? Do you have any stats like that or no?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "39:30", "start": 2369.74, "text": "I have it in my blog post, which is an Ellen router. from top of my head. the, the blog post was from one and a half years ago, so improved definitely. So on top of my head, it's something between two, three seconds, per payment, average payment. and payment re-reliability, they're usually payments work, but the problem is, the higher you go with the amount in the payment, the more difficult it gets Like I was surprised this one thousand two hundred, USD payment, came through on Finnic so quickly, to be honest. So we are definitely making progress there, and it will only get better over time." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "40:17", "start": 2417.25, "text": "Right, I see. Yeah, I see here you've got here, fifty percent of all Lightning payments take more than eight point six seconds. Oh, looking something on the website. But, I mean, these are improving over time. And it also, I think, to what you were saying earlier, I think in earlier days of Lightning, there were a lot of Tor users, and then a lot of the Tor users were sort of slowing down the response, the responsiveness, in terms of the network and the reliability, whereas if you were just using a typical consumer-grade wallet and you're paying That was working fine, so it's kind of like, your experience really will vary, and that's why some people are sort of saying, \"Oh, wow, it's not working for me,\" and other people are like, \"Hey, it's working for me, I haven't noticed any issues.\" So it's, it's a strange thing, but, I guess, yeah, it really, it really will vary, and hopefully it, it, you know, keeps improving, which, which it has done." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "41:09", "start": 2468.54, "text": "Please guys, don't run Tor routing nodes. Don't do it. It really doesn't serve us. I know being anonymous is great, and I know there's a need there, but a routing node Tor is just not optimal at the moment. You can always run an, Tor end node, an, like a Lightning node with Tor, last mile, your last channel, so, because that's just it will impact you, and will give you privacy. Which is good, but in between routing nodes, it's difficult. Use a VPN or so, way better." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "41:47", "start": 2507.15, "text": "Back to the show in a moment. Mempool.space is the leading Bitcoin and blockchain visualizer, so you can use this as a tool when you're about to send a Bitcoin transaction or if you need to check the history of a particular Bitcoin transaction. So what you can do is you can take that TX ID, which is the unique identifier for that Bitcoin transaction, and you can search that on mempool.space. Or you can even just go and browse mempool.space and it will show you the different fee priority levels that you can set in terms of how quickly you want your transaction to be confirmed. Mempool.space is free and open source, you can even host it and run it yourself, and of course, keep an eye out for the upcoming mempool accelerator. This is a new service that will be coming soon in a month or two, and I, I'm looking forward to seeing this. This will be a great feature for people who have a stuck transaction and need to pay to get that transaction accelerated. You can find out more over at mempool dot space. And finally, coinkite dot com. When it comes to securing our Bitcoin, there's hardware that can help us secure our coins. At coinkite, they are known for creating the Coldcard, which is my favorite Bitcoin hardware device. I use it in, various setups of my own, and you can use it in various setups, whether you're a beginner, you're intermediate, or you're advanced, you can use devices like the Coldcard to generate your Bitcoin private keys. You can use it to sign Bitcoin transactions, meaning when you go to spend, you can spend and sign that transaction using this device. And what you're doing is you're keeping those keys offline. So if you're a beginner, just get a cold card and a USB-C cable, plug it into your computer, and use it with a software wallet such as Sparrow Wallet or Specter Desktop. Now, if you're intermediate or advanced, you can use more advanced methods of using the cold card, such as a micro SD card or multi-signature. There's all kinds of features like- Passphrases and JURIS pins and things like that, that you can find out more by visiting the website over at coinkite dot com and use the code livera for a discount there. And now back to the show. Okay, great. so let's dig a little further into some of the LSP spec ideas. So, you know, we, we gave a, you gave a bit, a bit, a bit of a bit of an overview earlier, but I think it would be good to maybe dig into some specific things that are happening at the LSP spec level, around specific features. So I think probably a good one, a good example might be what's known as a JIT channel or J I T, just in time channel. So can you explain a little bit what is a J-J I T" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "44:20", "start": 2660.05, "text": "Yeah, sure. So with Lightning, you have a bit of a problem. You are a new user to Lightning, you don't have any funds, you don't have on-chain funds and you don't have Lightning funds, and you don't have a Lightning channel. So to first receive your first, Lightning Bitcoin, you need to have a channel, but at an LSP you need to pay for this channel. So you have this circle which you can't resolve, and, you basically it, it, it's a problem onboarding new users and now there is a technique which, we call just in time channels, CHIT channel, and this just in time channel is, If somebody sends you a Lightning payment, the LSP will open a turbo channel instantly towards you and will forward this payment, and the channel is going to be paid By having a bigger routing fee on this payment there. So you solve this problem onboarding issue you have, and, the only thing that you need to be aware of is that the payment that you receive is at least as big as the channel fee that you're gonna pay. And yeah, it's a great technique to actually, onboard new users to Lightning." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "45:52", "start": 2751.86, "text": "Great. And so I guess the main downside, and this comes back to what we were talking about earlier in terms of on-chain fees. So it makes more sense to do this for larger amounts, so that way you can amortize that channel cost. Across a bigger amount. So I think the ideal case for a lot of users, i-i maybe in the future, is if they can take their pay in Lightning and it's like a bigger amount, like even if they're taking like a thousand dollar payment and they're paying, you know, a three dollar channel fee, then that makes a lot more sense and it feels a lot more kind of rational, rather than people who are taking like a twenty dollar fee and paying a three dollar channel fee, then it sort of feels a bit, oh, well, okay, I'm paying, you know, And I think for, for newer users as well, maybe they don't understand that this is like, no, you need like a one time channel setup with this capacity, and once you've got that and you're spending and earning out of it, you don't have to hit the chain that often. But It, it comes down to these factors of channel sizing, how are you using it, in terms of what makes sense for people, and so again, it comes back to choosing the right tool for the job" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "47:02", "start": 2821.96, "text": "Yeah, exactly. I think we need to solve this, somehow with a better UI and also with a little bit of user education what this means, when you onboard a new user. But that's a very tricky question. You can't just put a blob of text that educates the user, if you just have somebody that downloaded your app. So, I don't know yet how to solve it, but it will be solved somehow." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "47:28", "start": 2847.95, "text": "Right, and I think the other aspect is when somebody gets onboarded and maybe they take their first funds on chain, and then now the question is, okay, I need to open a channel. And I, and I've seen in the BitKit, the UI there is more like, you, you take, you know, you fund the wallet on chain, or you can do this, and then you can choose to open the channel, and then that, at that point, in BitKit, it can sort of show you, okay, how much inbound do you want, how much are you willing to pay" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "47:58", "start": 2877.55, "text": "Exactly. So we're trying to innovate on, solutions there. In BitKit, ex-as you said, we have a slider where you can go back and forth and see how much, you wanna move over, you see how much inbound, you will get. But again, I believe there needs to be some more innovation, and I'm not sure how yet. maybe you should interview our, designer, Aldert. He can tell you probably more. Yeah. I briefly met him," }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "48:24", "start": 2903.86, "text": "yeah. He was the one I met, in Lugano. Plan B, Lugano, yeah." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "48:27", "start": 2906.81, "text": "Yeah, yeah. so yeah, that's not really my strong suit, I just pushed this problem to him." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "48:34", "start": 2914.31, "text": "Fair enough, fair enough. Okay. and so, what else is there from an LSP spec perspective that, you wanna get into? Like we've spoken about JIT channels. oh, one other idea is, maybe around understanding The rate. So I think people have spoken about this concept as like rate cards. what, what, what does that look like in an LSP world? Can you elaborate a little bit more on rate cards? So as in, how much is it, how much is the percent fee going to be, and how much is it to open? I think some people were talking about this. Maybe this is more applicable in like a liquidity add context, maybe that's not as much of an LSP context, that's maybe more like Lightning protocol level, but I, I wonder if there" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "49:19", "start": 2958.95, "text": "I mean, you will have a, so when you, so okay, LSPS one is another specific-- So we have an LSPS two which is channel specification, we have LSPS one, which is a channel purchase specification, which is very similar to, liquidity ads. it has some advantages over liquidity ads, that you can also pay a new channel with Lightning, with, with liquidity ads, you can't. And we also defined how are the, the rates there, how are the, the, the, the fees that you need to pay, for this channel. But it's basically just The LSP indicating, hey, if you want a channel this size, this is the base cost, this is the variable cost. I believe Liquidity Adds does something similar or, or exactly the same. So I'm not-- oh, rate cards, is this proposal from Nifty, I believe, that she proposed, I believe, half a year ago or a year ago, but I don't believe it actually is going into Liquidity Adds, might be wrong. Right." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "50:31", "start": 3030.6, "text": "Okay, gotcha. Yeah, maybe that was- My confusion, I think I'd, I might have heard that idea from Lisa and then thought it got in when it didn't. But I guess that's interesting as well, because it's sort of, you've got almost like a sort of competition between what's happening at Lightning protocol level and then what's happening at LSPs, one, channel purchase level. And they're sort of competing with each other, but not exactly." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "50:53", "start": 3053.2, "text": "Yeah, I mean, let's, let's say a year ago we all thought, \"Uh, liquidity adds is basically dead. It was a great approach, I really like liquidity adds, but nobody really worked on it anymore. I guess everybody was busy, and now it looks like it gets picked up again.\" yeah, I'm looking forward to, another protocol and, hope a wide adoption in the Lightning Network." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "51:18", "start": 3078.04, "text": "Great. Okay, so are there any other, LSP spec items that we've missed here that you wanna get into here?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "51:24", "start": 3084.27, "text": "Yes. so there's LSP S4, which is probably gonna be an upgrade to LSP, the, the, the channel LSP two spec. and then there is LSPS5, which is something completely different, which is right now in a very early proposal stage. We're just about to dig into it deeper, but it is solving a problem in the Lightning Network that when you want to receive a payment on your mobile phone, The problem is you kind of need to wake up the app to actually receive. So on the Lightning Network, you need to be online to actually receive a payment, to sign the new, channel update. And if you have a mobile phone, this, is very difficult to do because the mobile phone puts the app in the background, puts the app to sleep, and you don't get any CPU time to actually do something. LSPS5 is a proposal so the LSP can send a mobile notification to the app and actually wake up the app And when you get a mobile notification, you get, depending on the operations operating system and whatever, you get around thirty seconds of CPU time. Which is plenty to actually receive the payment and then at the end show a notification, hey, you, got, a notification and a payment here. And that's LSPS5, and I believe this will solve the problem of receiving funds on, a mobile app, at least partially, not one hundred percent, because there's still flight mode and sometimes you don't have a connection, but most of the time it will work." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "53:19", "start": 3198.56, "text": "Interesting. And so this relates to asynchronous payments as well, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "53:24", "start": 3203.5, "text": "Asynchronous payments is another puzzle piece there, which is not the same as this mobile notification approach, but if we-- as soon as we have asynchronous payments and this mobile notification approach, then we probably cover ninety-five percent of all use cases." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "53:44", "start": 3224.15, "text": "Interesting, right? Because, yeah, as you said, one of them relates to waking up the mobile phone when it needs to be woken up, and asynchronous payments is more like the generalized idea of having, let's say, the LSPs help offline payments or at least payments where the user isn't online. So I guess they're, they're related and useful together, and so this would be really cool in a context where, you know, people have Sometimes they sort of reminisce back to the early days of Bitcoin when you just had this on-chain payment address, and they, they say, \"Oh, well, see, it's, it's just not as reliable as have, you know, Lightning's not as reliable as just having, back in the old days when you just did an on-chain payment to my ad-- here's my address, you pay me whenever you want, and I just pick it up whenever I want.\" But obviously the problem is that doesn't-- on-chain payments won't scale to the world. Obviously, Lightning is more scalable," }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "54:41", "start": 3280.67, "text": "enable people to come back to something like that old experience, but with a scalable approach. and so, yeah, so that'll be really interesting to see." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "54:50", "start": 3290.4, "text": "As soon as we have properly decentralized lightning addresses As soon as we have offline receiving, then you basically have the equivalent of a Bitcoin address, and then you have really good payment experience" }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "55:06", "start": 3306.47, "text": "Yeah. I'm curious if you have any, if you-- well, if this is something you wanna get into or not around Bolt 12 as contrasted with like Lightning address as opposed to something like slash tags, which I know the Synonym team is, is pushing that idea more." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "55:21", "start": 3321.41, "text": "Yes. So there's a lot of things to unpack there. I'm not the biggest pro in slash tax, so if you wanna get a deep dive there, then talk to John or one of our, peer-to-peer engineers. Sure. Bolt 12 is already very good to actually receive funds anonymously, and then you have your sta- your static invoice, and you do, onion routing to go back and forth and actually communicate, which is already pretty good" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "55:56", "start": 3355.9, "text": "Lightning addresses at the moment, you need an HTTP server, which is probably hosted by somebody, so it's not so decentralized and under your control. it gets improved now with the newest proposal, which you might have read on the, Lightning mailing list. They have a proposal up that you put these values on the DNS server, which is a step forward, but in my head, you can still improve Prove this and, but maybe let's talk about this another time." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "56:30", "start": 3390.1, "text": "Right. Yeah, yeah. So let's see what happens there. and I think Yeah, there's a range of these different competing approaches, and people are just gonna try different things out there, and, you know, something will stick. And, the-- and it's funny because Sometimes the approach that's not the most, you know, technically purest, often can win out just because it's like easy, you know, a-and so we'll see that there's competing standards. As we've seen, even in the, in the Bitcoin on-chain world, things like Bip thirty-nine versus Electrum Seed versus a-z, a-e-z, the LND one, and other approaches, and it's, or the Bitcoin Core keypool older approach, and it seemed like Bip thirty-nine just sort of won out at least in the hardware wallets This world, and so maybe it's gonna be a similar thing, people will just sort of have these different approaches and whichever one, sort of plays out there. So, I guess looking forward, what do you see as sort of the, the next kind of big things that'll come in the sort of short to medium term? What do you, what are you looking at coming in Lightning?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "57:41", "start": 3460.81, "text": "Yeah. Ball 12, obviously, when it's actually coming at some point, but I'm optimistic it will hopefully come in the next 12 months, especially because LND is now So not Lightning Labs, but an, an external project which is, doing LDK is now working on pole twelve, onion routing for LND. And so I'm relatively optimistic this will come and this will bring a big improvement to the, network from a privacy point of view, but also from a usability point of view. We will need, as Lightning developers, we will need to scale our infrastructure to a bull market, scale, which will highly likely onboard us a lot of more users. So that's a big development that is also happening in next year, and the whole peer-to-peer space is very interesting You can do a lot of things on with peer-to-peer applications that traditionally in the last ten years you probably would have taken a blockchain for and there is a lot of development going. It isn't so easy to do, but I predict we will have an explosion of peer-to-peer applications potentially in the next two years, especially also coming from Synonym." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "59:14", "start": 3553.72, "text": "Great, and so this also aligns, I guess, similarly with like Keat and other applications using Keat style infrastructure, and so for, for people who don't know Keat, is also, by, the Bitfinex, hole punch team, and the idea is it's peer to peer and using, this, kind of similar to BitTorrent style approach, like a DHT sort of approach, but allowing people to do chat and other things. so it'll be interesting to see, and as I understand, slash tags is sort of similar in some elements using like a DHT to help share the information around relating people's identity and payments, that they can self- You, whole punch is" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:00:00", "start": 3599.97, "text": "our whole punch is our sister company, so we'll use techniques from them, we will also innovate on some other things. And, with slash tags, we wanna bring peer-to-peer, you own your own data, technology to the user, to Bitcoin, to our lightning wallet, and really create your decentralized, payment experience from scratch." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "01:00:24", "start": 3624.71, "text": "Right. and I guess just closing up, any, anything to update on Blocktank or what people can look forward to there with Blocktank, the LSP side?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:00:34", "start": 3634.52, "text": "we're about so right now our focus is on scaling, but there is also the, the, the LSP spec happening, which we're gonna integrate into BitKit, so you will, in BitKit, you will have, the The LSP spec experience where you can choose your own LSP and, at some point even US users can use BitKit. And on Blocktank side, at some point we need to implement the LSP spec as well and, Yeah, that is the basically the roadmap, like preparing for bull markets, like fixing bugs everywhere, make everything way more smoother, way more better, and the LSP spec" }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "01:01:21", "start": 3681.48, "text": "Great. Okay, well, let's finish up here. where can people find you online and find your work?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:01:27", "start": 3687.01, "text": "Yeah, sure. So, you can always follow me on Twitter, Severin Alex B. I run Alan Router on the side, which is a service, lightning service for routing node operators, which is Alan Router dot app. have a look at Synonym, Synonym dot to. Just a company I work for where we create BitKit, also BitKit dot eu, and yeah, check out BitKit, the Lightning wallet, and, Yeah." }, { "speaker": "severin_buhler_from_synonym", "time": "01:01:59", "start": 3719.98, "text": "Excellent. Well, thanks for joining me and chat soon. Bye. Thank you very much. Ciao, Stefan. If you enjoyed the show, make sure to press like, share it out there, leave a comment, and I'm looking forward to seeing you in the citadels." } ] }