Nostr Web Client

Those articles are hieroglyphics to me. What does a drivechain do exactly? Why would Bitcoin need anything like this right now?

What added "functionalities" and "security" do they provide?

I mean Taproot was clear.

[809713]

BTCapsule 🏴 2y ago

With drivechains, privacy tech and larger blocks for scalability would be on an L2, so that L1 isn’t effected. If they were merged before SegWit and Taproot, we wouldn’t have a 4x blocksize increase or monkee jpegs on L1.

The way it works is you send your Bitcoin to a special address and receive a 1-to-1 peg to a copy of a shitcoin’s code. So you wouldn’t actually receive Monero. You would receive something like Bit-Monero, that has the exact same functionality (private transactions), but limited to Bitcoin’s 21 million supply cap.

Whenever you want to peg out, you burn the L2 coin and request your Bitcoin from the miners. They don’t know who you are or care whatsoever. All they want to do is check if the peg-out hash is valid, mine the block, and get the fees.

Does that make sense so far?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Merrcurr⚡️ 2y ago

But how can you ensure the security and integrity of the peg-out process when transitioning between Layer 2 (L2) and Layer 1 (L1) in this solution?

[809717]

BTCapsule 🏴 2y ago

The security of the peg-out is backed by the greed of the miners. They are incentivized to mine the blocks and keep the system going with PoW. So it’s a bunch of game-theory and everything that currently keeps Bitcoin secure.

If a sidechain is successful, the miners get a steady income of actual L1 Bitcoin from it. So an L2 could be just as decentralized as BitcoinCASH (which is much better than Liquid or Fedimints), have increasingly better technology and privacy, and be completely backed by L1.

The Daniel ⚡️ 2y ago

I have no plans to run this BIP on my node. I don't trust any so-called "urgent" protocol changes. It sounds way too convoluted and risky.

BTCapsule 🏴 2y ago

That is a perfectly reasonable response. But if the Core devs say they have another "soft fork" that doesn’t include drivechains, but includes CTV, would you leave the highest timechain?

The Daniel ⚡️ 2y ago

I don’t have a use for drivechains or CTV myself but I will always support whatever the consensus fork is to preserve the longest PoW chain. I just don’t see why any of this is critical for bitcoin to succeed.

BTCapsule 🏴 2y ago

Have you read this? It basically explains how in order to scale Bitcoin, we will eventually need Lightning factories and custodial solutions because on-chain transactions and the liquidity needed to run a lightning channel will be so high. There is a scaling issue, and I believe drivechains are the best option for future scaling and privacy.

https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/thoughts-on-scaling-and-consensus-changes-2023/32

The Daniel ⚡️ 2y ago

I have not read this random article. I’m sure if the issue is important enough to solve by consensus there will be plenty of time to discuss it over the next few years. I’m still experiencing PTSD from the last scaling debate so forgive me if I don’t get too excited about any one proposal.