L2s can't be a complete replacement for an L1 like Monero
Fedimints are custodial and mints can print IOUs unbacked by Bitcoin.
Sidechains are not fungible with the base layer and wouldn't have other important aspects of Monero like it's discrete and decentralized ASIC-resistant mining.
ASIC resistant mining is very stupid, and acts as a centralizing force
Describing fedimints and side chains as custodial is a bit of a simplification. Either way though, I’d love to see a product like this be constructed and let the market decide it’s usefulness.
ASICs have two major manufacturers that both require KYC. They consolidate on large corporate ASIC mining farms. Sounds centralizing to me. Very obvious energy draw, sound, and heat as well. Also no secret what it's purpose is for if discovered.
Meanwhile nearly everyone on the planet has multiple general purpose CPUs. Ubiquity can't be beat and hidden in plain sight.
I didn't say side chains were custodial.
I said fedimints were custodial and rehypothecateable. It's not a simplification it's just true.
Of course, I don't want to stop fedimints being put out to the market they have their place, I'm just saying it isn't the exact same usecase as Monero.
The only way to keep an algorithm “ASIC proof” is to continuously keep switching it out through hard forks, which is what monero does. The miners may stay decentralized, but the nodes themselves all have to centralize around agreed upon changes, which is much more damaging than mining farms. Also, there will always be actors with access to more computing power than others, no matter how CPU based your mining is.
Mining is an economic business which benefits from economies of scale. Sure, you can argue that our current structure isn’t sufficiently distributed (although I would disagree) but either way, it doesn’t matter because users and nodes effectively pay miners through fees and subsidies. The miners cannot make changes and cannot collude to attack because ultimately if they did, the nodes do ONE hard fork and their entire businesses go up in smoke.
We probably agree more than we disagree, because I have nothing against people using monero. I just correct people who try and claim it rivals Bitcoin as money. I think that some type of system which uses moneros privacy structure but is denominated in Bitcoin would be incredibly popular. I understand that it’s fundamentally not the same as L1 Monero, but L1 Monero isn’t very appealing to me as a monetary good. At best, it’s a limited transaction medium with superior privacy.
Fair enough.
Don't disagree with people having varying levels of computing power. My point is CPU mining is more accessible to everyone than ASICs (potential for decentralization is much higher) in addition to it being inconspicuous.
I don't place as much importance in centralization in that specific aspect because we can opt out like any free market.
I think the important thing is that the code is transparent and FOSS. No one can stop users from selling, swapping, or forking their Monero.
I never found the argument "we never hardfork, and your coin sucks for it, but if X happened we could just hardfork" very convincing. You can't take both sides of that argument and remain coherent. Bitcoin's strength is the confidence that it will never hardfork.
I also think we would agree on most things and I don't disagree with anything in your last paragraph. I think Monero makes a better MoE or p2p digital *cash* (real world fungibility and strong default privacy). It's not supposed to be an investment or SoV and makes no promises about that.
