There is no MEV like on ETH. And it’s not federated. The main purpose of drivechain is make sidechains trust-less rather federated. Miners are profit seeking as subsidies drop after each halving cycle miners become reliant on transaction fees they will benefit from blind merge mining sidechains. Censoring transactions is bad for mining business so there is no incentive to censor.
Merge mining already exists on federated side chains like Rootstock (no down time in 6 years)
Hashrate escrow is in effect miner multisig, that's a bad idea with known and unknown distortion of incentives and not even worth discussing unless/until broad adoption of SV2. Drivechains is not as interesting vis-a-vis STARK verifier (Maxwell's Coinwitness), which is a lot more practical now than when it was proposed and would make RGB trustless. DC should be allowed to die.
Is RGB not trustless already? Tbh unlit read into RGB seems very complicated.
Would be nice to see your actual criticisms instead of just these hot takes.
You want everyone to subscribe to your blind spots and irrational theories about drivechains obsoleting altcoins, without understanding the incentives for creating altcoins. You think it's because altcoins have legitimate use case? How do you propose to achieve the level of trust minimization wrt sidechains vis-a-vis a STARK verifier, and what use case does it address that RGB & DLCs cannot? How about you try to steelman the case against DC? People have generally moved on from the idea because they don't like the way it distorts miner incentives. Even if there was broad adoption of SV2, I still don't see a strong case for drivechains. Let's focus on covenants, which, inter alia, helps scale DLCs, and STARK verifier.
