Nostr Web Client

It does the opposite. It opens one gate to funnel an attack through. An attack you can see for months down the line and prepare for.

Right now, we do not know where any attack might come from. We can keep handwaving away competing projects up until one kicks us in the nuts, or some internal error or consiete undoes BTC.

RGB is great for example, but it is playing catch up with all the proof of concept and market/brain/money theft Eth has taken away in the interim.

Drivechain allows us to experiment with any new proposal, keep core safe and say to any other project "we can do that,but better".

it is a moat around bitcoin that allows a strategic drawbridge

nobody 2y ago

I appreciate the response and viewpoint. Keeping Bitcoin simple has ossified it though. Purposely, it has limited the attack surfaces. Which is why it's the hardest money ever created. Without this security, Bitcoin has nothing.

I think no blockchain could 'compete' with it due to a multitude of reasons but its due mostly because core and the idea of what core should be, is simple.

Usually the first ideas of innovation are the best.

This is where it's strength lies. It's simple, secure and it works as being the hardest money EVER.

Ethereum, Solana etc think, mistakenly, they do better things than Bitcoin. But they don't. Their L1's are not as robust and secure.

To me the ultimate test is there's nothing stopping any group from locking or holding Bitcoins up to be pegged in to a sidechain. It's like placing gold in a vault.

Drivechain sounds like it wants to melt the gold, invite the metal smith's into the plant and create alloys that might blow the whole thing up.

I don't understand the code of drivechain to evaluate the widening of the attack surface. But my question would be, for anyone, ethereum, monero, solana are hoping to be Swiss army knives while Bitcoin is a Katana. How do you justify whittling away the katana to add a corkscrew?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

In the terms you use, it is not melting bitcoin or reshaping the katana.

Bip300 places x amount of bitcoin aside in a trustless bank, that can be taken from, if you want to leave the side chain project. Like using a house as a security against a credit card. It puts skin in the game where altcoins and other blockchains can just rugpull. This is the hashrate escrow.

Bip301 allows these other projects to mine their POW blockchain projects alongside normal miner block mining of bitcoin. This is BLIND merged mining.

These are two halves of DC and Paul's vision and research into what bitcoin could do. But we in the Pro-Dc camp would be happy if even just Bip 300 was adopted. we feel BIP 301 would be the logical extension for pow sidechain projects, but that can come later if it needs to.

Lets just focus on what Bip 300 enables. It allows the katana to keep being a katana. But after a softfork, (the soft is important because it means everything stays the same and is backwards compatible, like playing ps1 games on ps4) the katana is also now a machine gun, ready for world war 2. It can, if technology advances, also add surface to air missiles. This doesn't work with physical objects, hardware, but it does with software. We do not know, like the old samuras what future advance makes us, btc obsolete. Dc alows us a way to respond to these innovations AND keep the bitcoin we love.

Things you might want to add are a monero like simple privacy experience, or zcash like features. There is even an EthSide on Dc so their version smart contracts, if you want. All backed by btc.

if there are security holes or threats to bitcoin, technical arguments should be made on the open source proposal. DC has been around a longtime and these arguments have been answered for years already. All that's left so far is FUD. Big players stand to lose market share if BIP 300 is adopted. Names like blockstream and liquid (because its the same thing but open to you and not just big companies).

The project is open to real critisism, technical or game theoretic. But they must come from people who actualy understand DC first. Most people at this stage in the debate are dismissing it right away.

nobody 2y ago

"Bip300 places x amount of bitcoin aside in a trustless bank, that can be taken from, if you want to leave the side chain project. Like using a house as a security against a credit card. It puts skin in the game where altcoins and..."

-This sounds like altcoin stuff. Not the hardest money ever created. You mentioned: banks, credit cards and houses to justify wanting Bitcoin to leave the main chain to "put skin" in the game for alt coins. No thanks. Sidechains do this fine. Zooming coins in and out opens attack surface for unseeable attacks just like NO ONE saw Taproot leading to Ordinals.

-And Ordinals are, essentially, alt coin fluff/garbage. So no thanks to open up attack portals.

"Things you might want to add are a monero like simple privacy experience, or zcash like features. There is even an EthSide on Dc so their version smart contracts, if you want. All backed by btc."

-No. You misunderstand Bitcoin. It's the hardest money ever created. Not a shitcoin. If you want something else, go use it. You're trying to make Bitcoin a Swiss army knife. Keep that stuff away from Bitcoin. It soils the name.

"if there are security holes or threats to bitcoin, technical arguments should be made on the open source proposal."

-Any opening of attack surfaces is just that. Potential for unseen and uncalculable threats. Your reasoning that DC makes these able to be foreseen is wrong IMO. It doesn't. It just opens the surface.

"DC has been around a longtime and these arguments have been answered for years already. All that's left so far is FUD."

-Disagree. I haven't been convinced of it and it's not FUD. It's wanting to preserve the purest form of the idea of a digital P2P currency that is the hardest money ever created.

"Big players stand to lose market share if BIP 300 is adopted. Names like blockstream and liquid (because its the same thing but open to you and not just big companies)."

-Anyone can propose and run a sidechain tbh.

"The project is open to real critisism, technical or game theoretic. But they must come from people who actualy understand DC first. Most people at this stage in the debate are dismissing it right away."

-Nah. I don't buy that gatekeeping. People are allowed to want the purest form of money ever and have it as it is. They're justified to want it to be whoever they want. Just like you are justified to want Bitcoin to be intertwined with shitcoins. It's a disagreement of purpose based on opening unknown attack vectors, and purpose of the hardest money ever.

Risks and functions outweigh the use IMO at this point.

You're free to fork the project and make drivechain? Maybe that's an avenue you guys can follow...?

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

>"-This sounds like altcoin stuff. Not the hardest money ever created. You mentioned: banks, credit cards and houses to justify wanting Bitcoin to leave the main chain"

I did not, i used them as nontechnical examples to help you understand, not 1:1 corelations. A hash escrow is nothing like a centralized bank, but they both do store value in a secure place for you to take from later. I can only simplify this stuff so much before it breaks down. You have to meet me half way.

>Zooming coins in and out opens attack surface for unseeable attacks just like NO ONE saw Taproot leading to Ordinals.

Are you smoking weed ? DC prevents future errors like the ordinal side effect. It moves changes like taproot off chain. Several experimental bips have already been implemented in DC.

>No. You misunderstand Bitcoin. It's the hardest money ever created. Not a shitcoin. If you want something else, go use it. You're trying to make Bitcoin a Swiss army knife. Keep that stuff away from Bitcoin. It soils the name.

Are you a bot ? You just keep regurgitating the same catch phrase. Bitcoin is the hardest money because there will only be 21 million, not because the code never changes. With DC there is still only 21 million. The fundamentals remain.

>Any opening of attack surfaces is just that. Potential for unseen and uncalculable threats. Your reasoning that DC makes these able to be foreseen is wrong IMO. It doesn't. It just opens the surface.

ITS NOT OPENING AN ATTACK SURFACE, IT'S DOING THE EXACT OPPOSITE. Increasing the protection zone between bad things and core !

>-Disagree. I haven't been convinced of it and it's not FUD. It's wanting to preserve the purest form of the idea of a digital P2P currency that is the hardest money ever created.

Dumbass bot just keep repeating the same dumbass saifdean catchphrase. Not one technical counter argument. Fuck off.

>-Nah. I don't buy that gatekeeping. People are allowed to want the purest form of money ever and have it as it is. They're justified to want it to be whoever they want. Just like you are justified to want Bitcoin to be intertwined with shitcoins. It's a disagreement of purpose based on opening unknown attack vectors, and purpose of the hardest money ever.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.

>Risks and functions outweigh the use IMO at this point.

Of course they do, because you can barely tie your own shoelaces and can't read an FAQ.

>You're free to fork the project and make drivechain? Maybe that's an avenue you guys can follow...

You don't even know what the difference between a soft and hardfork is.

I'm done with your dumb.

nobody 2y ago

Usually know I've won an argument when the other person can't articulate their points and can default to name calling and swearing. Bad look. 😬

My points are salient. If they're so utterly wrong you should be able to easily dismantle them. I'm not overly tied to my opinion.

Sorry you got triggered into swearing and insults. I'm thinking it drives my point home even further if this is the sort of ethos and attitudes around drivechain...

Roger Ver used to rage and throw insults like this too back in the BCash days. I say you guys follow suit. Hard fork Bitcoin, call it "Bitcoin DC".

I'll send you some sats as seed money even.

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

>my core heuristic is that if my hot takes are so dumb, repetitive and out of scope the other person uses language i don't like, i've won.

i gave good answers and you replied with nonsense. obvious troll

nobody 2y ago

No. I just see the risk:use ratio and a LOT of us are in the same view. Your analogies were about Air missles, Playstation and credit cards.

I appreciate your effort but speak about the code changes directly without jargon maybe? Or articulate WHY it's even needed. Sidechains and L2 seems decent enough.

My repeated point about it being the hardest money ever created was illustrating that something incredible has been invented. And it's working! If we implemented every gOoD iDeA to come along the Bitcoin would be Solana or Shiba Inu.

Bip300 isn't a small change and augments the use case considerably.

Maybe Drivechain *is the bees knees but yeah, yelling and name calling gives off Bcash vibes.

Bitcoin doesn't need to change to allow in/out 'trustless' escrow so shitcoins can exist on it in this manner.

And if it does you're doing a bad job of explaining it.

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

Your analogies were about katanas and swiss army knives and melting gold. I met you at that level of description.

What do you mean by side chains are Decent enough ? DC allows sidechains without damaging bitcoin. If you support lightning and liquid, you support DC.

What do you mean by risk:use ratio ? The risks are quantized and the uses are unlimited so your ratio is n:8 which is nonsense.

>Maybe Drivechain *is the bees knees....

Oh, i see, you are from the 1800's. No wonder you are so lost. These fancy electric gramaphones in your hand are pretty gosh darn neat huh ?

> Bitcoin doesn't need to change to allow in/out 'trustless' escrow so shitcoins can exist on it in this manner

If the shitcoin exist on bitcoin with DC, what are they escrowing in and out of ? This what i mean you don't understand DC or even basic sentences strung together. Just stay out of commenting on bleeding edge issues, or read more and be less dismissive of proposals you don't actually understand.

If you had at any point said something useful or indicated the ability to understand new concepts, i would not have used "bad" words.

Dc is not a popularity contest, its a technology it doesn't care if you or anyone else have good feelings in your tummy about it.

It stands on its own merits and not the soothing public blowjob ability of anyone talking about, it does not fall because of vested interest promoting the boring catchphrases and dead mental memes you keep using that are not arguments against DC.

nobody 2y ago

It's also not that I just don't like your language. I'm just not about name calling and swearing at ppl with different views. Twitter is more that vibe tbh.

And I find usually people do this when they've lost an argument and have no other rebuttle or explanation and are triggered someone else has a different view. 🤷‍♂️

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

I have plenty of rebuttles. This conversation devolved into flames because of switching apps and reading the drivechain FAQ you replied dumb shit i had just answered.

Behavior like that is worth insulting. Seriously stop replying and read something more than 140 characters.

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

Instead of *

nobody 2y ago

Haha. Opened Twitter and saw this.

Cyber Seagull 2y ago

Saifdean is a grifter. A very smart and quick witted economist. He's like the person i was fucking at the time when bitcoin came out and said "Well the state will just buy up all the bitcoin and control it." But far less attractive and far worse tits.