{"id":2218,"date":"2024-12-31T17:59:01","date_gmt":"2024-12-31T17:59:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mar101xy.com\/blog\/?p=2218"},"modified":"2024-12-31T17:59:02","modified_gmt":"2024-12-31T17:59:02","slug":"how-to-never-miss-a-zap-in-the-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mar101xy.com\/blog\/?p=2218","title":{"rendered":"How to never miss a zap in the future."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Imagine a future where we could link multiple Lightning addresses from different wallets on platforms like Nostr\u2014or anywhere else. Why is this important? If one address goes offline, you’d have a backup ready, ensuring you never miss a zap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I recently noticed that BTCPay Server allows you to create multiple Lightning addresses, which is incredibly useful. However, there\u2019s a limitation: all those addresses are tied to the same instance. If the entire instance goes down\u2014rare, but not impossible\u2014the backup plan falls apart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A potential solution could be running two separate BTCPay Server instances, with one serving as a backup. While this adds complexity, it\u2019s a step towards true resilience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

BTCPay is still in its early stages with Lightning, but it has immense potential to dominate the space. Its features make it an excellent tool for being self-sovereign, eliminating reliance on third-party Lightning wallets. That said, Lightning itself remains a bit finicky, and even with my own Lightning node, I frequently encounter errors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, the future is promising. BTCPay could lead the way in creating robust solutions like this. It’s just an idea to inspire developers to think about what’s next.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n\"multiple<\/a>\n
\n
\n\n\n\n

\n Note ID:\n
\n note1zl20kckvh3vctxln90henx9nuv4yp2p5xxl4mug25amsu240lvgsz207w0\n <\/code>\n
\n