>The proposal gives power to miners that they don’t currently have.

More power over what ? The side chain or bitcoin itself ?

>power over the bitcoin network.

How ? How exactly does bip 300/301 do this. I want precise technical examples.

>What happens if miners drop support for a previously operating drivechain?

What happens if miners steal funds or act maliciously? The probability of these events might be low, but the risk of chaos if they occur seems high.

These are risks that exist right now from liquid. Censorship has always been a risk and has not happened (yet) for reasons outlined in the DC FAQ. Its not to their advantage. Also that is a decision for use customer/user of a project to make, not you as king of bitcoin.

>I’m operating from the principle: “First, do no harm.” It doesn’t matter to me what the potential benefits are if there are material risks.

As a hikikimori, someone who never leaves your home, drives a car, eats food made by others, your contribution to risk analysis should probably be ignored.

DC does the least harm between the options of doing nothing, continuing to soft fork band aid solutions directly on to main chain with unwanted consequences (taproot) or testing them out on a DC sidechain first through one soft fork. DC has far more upsides than down.