Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Square CEO Jack Dorsey Says Bitcoin's Lightning Is Coming To Cash App (coindesk.com)

Posted by msmash on from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: A bitcoin scaling solution called the lightning network may soon come to Square's Cash App for mobile payments. Twitter and Square CEO Jack Dorsey, an investor in the bitcoin-oriented startup Lightning Labs, recently announced during an interview with podcaster Stephan Livera that there are plans to integrate the scaling technology with Square's mobile app. "It's not an 'if,' it's more of a 'when,' and how do we make sure that we're getting the speed that we need and the efficiency," Dorsey told Livera, adding: "We don't think it stops at buying and selling [bitcoin]. We do want to help make happen the currency aspect."

31 comments

  1. And how quickly can we expect the IRS to visit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tax evasion investigation in 3...2...1...

    1. Re:And how quickly can we expect the IRS to visit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say "evasion", and I say "avoision".

  2. Quick! Cue the economically-illiterate retorts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is all.

  3. Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by DogDude · · Score: 3, Funny

    Boy, if there's anything that says "privacy, reliability, efficiency, and security", it's "Twitter", "Square", and "Bitcoin". Sign me up! I've got money to waste!

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  4. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We just need paypal in there so they can hold your funds for 18 years while they investigate your account only to find nothing is wrong.

  5. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

    Bitcoin is all of those. Unfortunately, there's humans involved in the transactions, which is where the flaws reside.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  6. Screw Dorsey by Chas · · Score: 1

    He and his buttinsky payment processor can burn in Hell.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Screw Dorsey by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Square is cheaper than other CC processors, and collects no more information. AFAIK they are cheaper and less sleazy than Paypal. So what's to hate about Square?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Screw Dorsey by Chas · · Score: 1

      Their willingness to boot people for wrongthink?

      You think Dorsey saying "We can't afford to be neutral." extends ONLY to Twitter?

      If so, I've got a bridge to sell you...

      I have exactly ONE job I need a payment processor to perform.

      PROCESSING PAYMENTS.

      I do NOT need, nor do I want, them pushing an ideology on me or interfering with transactions between myself and my clientele!

      If that's "Too Hhhhharrrd" for them, they can fuck right the hell off, and I'll take my business elsewhere. All the while hoping they crash and burn in the ugliest possible way.

      Being dumped off a social media site? It sucks. And it's stupid in the extreme.

      Being shat upon by the person handling your money for you?

      That's the kind of thing that gets motherfuckers SHOT.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    3. Re:Screw Dorsey by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Their willingness to boot people for wrongthink?

      Every CC processor will do that. Literally.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Screw Dorsey by Chas · · Score: 1

      Every?

      Citation necessary.

      Sure, MC has decided to be stupid and dickish about this.

      I have yet to see Visa, Discover, Amex operate in this fashion.

      Also, if EVERY payment processor will, how did SubscribeStar manage to drum up another payment processor?

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    5. Re:Screw Dorsey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, but bitcoin was meant to be resistant to this kind of thing. Since it doesnt have widespread adoption at this point, you still have to use a centralized entity to convert the bitcoin to cash, especially if you need to convert rapidly due to things like you know, the massive volatility of the underlying currency.
      If coinbase or sqaure or whoever can ban you from their platform, then the entire premise of bitcoin has just been undermined.

    6. Re:Screw Dorsey by RedK · · Score: 1

      If itâ(TM)s not illegal, itâ(TM)s not their business. Payment processing is not an endorsement. Payment processors getting into the business of partisan politics and ideological enforcement is actually downright scary and Orwellian.

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
  7. Don't give a fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Square is used by Trump faggots. Fucking bullshit.

  8. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by DogDude · · Score: 1

    Did you mean that Bitcoin is "none" of those? Because it is exactly none of those things.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  9. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

    Bitcoin is private, in the sense that all you know is that address A sent X bitcoins to address B. You don't know who is associated with the addresses.
    Bitcoin is reliable and secure, because once the transactions are in the blockchain, nobody can block or revert them*.
    Bitcoin is efficient... well, at least it used to be, but it turns out proof-of-work is a terrible idea once you get past the proof-of-concept phase.

    * There's always the danger of a 51% attack, but anyone stupid enough to attempt that would destroy the value of their own coins.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  10. Sell Sell Sell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    grow your own tulips

  11. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    my program ran perfectly, it was a great program. the users however were really flawed.

  12. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Bitcoin is private, in the sense that all you know is that address A sent X bitcoins to address B. You don't know who is associated with the addresses."
    Unless you are in the business of also sending money to bank accounts, like coinbase and square do. If they have your bank account, they know who you are. If they then have at least one bitcoin address you sent funds to, they can follow the funds through the blockchain to find any other associated addresses. If you bought bitcoin through them and transfer it out, they see all that to and can follow it anywhere.

  13. A conference to watch on that matter. by slashways · · Score: 1

    We have a lot of noise in this space; And so many useless/doubtful projects. Bitcoin is censorship resistant, and lightning is the second layer allowing real scalability. A conference to watch: https://youtu.be/16T5CUNGX2Q

  14. Lightning seems dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been live for over a year now, and there are only 3100 Nodes, which translates to 3100 users.

    Due to the way lightning works, a user must stay connected to the network (or risk losing their coins), so it seems to be pretty much a dead technology.

    1. Re:Lightning seems dead by codebonobo · · Score: 1

      https://1ml.com/

      6,207 nodes

      24,932 channels

      Since some lightning wallets are custodial the amount of users exceed 10k using lightning today.

      Due to the way lightning works, a user must stay connected to the network (or risk losing their coins),

      This is completely false for many reasons. First of all , this only might apply to merchants receiving lightning transactions if fraud is attempted(same problem with credit cards BTW) where they need to have their node check online for a second at least once a 24 hour period to prevent fraud. If you are spending your lightning on a wallet like eclair or many others you have no fear of this occurring even if you leave your cellphone off for months. Secondly, to prevent the mild inconvenience of having your server/computer work at least 1 second every 24 hours watchtowers are being created.

      so it seems to be pretty much a dead technology.

      There are thousands of stores accepting lightning right now and many of us have been using lightning for purchasing goods and services all year long so it is alive and growing every day.

    2. Re:Lightning seems dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are thousands of stores accepting lightning right now and many of us have been using lightning for purchasing goods and services all year long so it is alive and growing every day.

      Really?

      I'd like to see a reference to a least one of these thousands of stores you mention.

    3. Re:Lightning seems dead by codebonobo · · Score: 1
      Sure . A single payment processor opened up lightning to over 4k of their merchants https://blog.coingate.com/2018...

      Here are other payment processors that provide lightning to all their clients bringing the numbers much higher-

      https://strike.acinq.co/

      https://opennode.co/

      https://globee.com/

      https://btcpayjungle.com/

      Also all merchants that use self hosted BTCpay software or casanodes -

      Here are some directories (incomplete):

      http://lightningnetworkstores....

      https://lightninglist.co/

      I have personally bought many things with lightning

    4. Re:Lightning seems dead by inking · · Score: 1

      You got to love the cryptocurrency guys.

      2009: The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
      2019: Here is a list of totally-not-banking institutions that you can send your money to to buy things. Why do we need them? Oh, it is because the technology behind crypto is so inefficient that once you apply even a modest load to it you suddenly need banking institutions or central authorities to keep the system running.

      It is pretty great how you guys managed to go through the evolution of modern banking in just a decade of your existence.

  15. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    But that's not the fault of the Bitcoin protocol, that's the exchanges themselves.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  16. Re:Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by codebonobo · · Score: 1

    Taproot, Dandelion, and lightning all make Bitcoin far more fungible and private. Wallets like https://wasabiwallet.io/ automatically use chaumian coinjoin with an anonymity set of 100 for every Bitcoin transaction to make privacy much simpler than traditional coinjoin. There is even some work on making a mimblewimble sidechain that lightning transactions can automatically perform cross atomic swaps to as well.

  17. Re: Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tainting coins by mixing is a very stupid idea.

  18. Re: Twiiter? Square? Bitcoin? Sign me up! by codebonobo · · Score: 1

    Just like with US dollars all currency with sufficient velocity are "tainted". AML/KYC exchanges either have to start banning all their clients(Not going to happen as big investors already bought into these companies) or change their policies to only restrict BTC from addresses that are directly tainted.