This is why need Drivechain so we dont let altcoin nostr clients compete on nostr.
Let’s allow bitcoin to become a privacy coin on layer 2! 
Discussion
May I ask, what is drive train?
It’s two BIP proposals (BIP300 + BIP301) that enable a decentralised 2 way peg from side chains to mainchain bitcoin.
So you can various bitcoins sidechains with various designs. You copy the code from Monero or ETH or whatever shitcoin but then add it to a bitcoin sidechain/layer 2. So bitcoiners get the benefit of extra functionality like privacy, defi, and scalability without the shitcoin.
The transaction fees on the sidechain go to bitcoin miners via merged mining originally created by Satoshi with Namecoin in 2011.
Why would we not want clients that support Monero? The whole point of #nostr being an open protocol is anyone can do this and if there is an audience for it (highly doubt it for Monero), the dev can build a successful app without needing permission
I am pro-monero btw. I am pro competition. I am pro innovation. Monery privacy trumps bitcoin by 100x.
All I am saying is, if we has bitcoin sidechain with Monero level privacy enabled by Drivechain then people would be more likely to sell their Monero for Bitcoin.
Not so sure about that. Bitcoiners always speak of network effects, well that applies to Monero too.
Drivechains would also have very different trade offs to an L1 like Monero so wouldn't be a complete replacement.
Liquid has strong privacy that is based on CT and though not as strong as Monero it is much better than Bitcoin, and many argue LBTC *is* Bitcoin just as lightning is. Now there are tradeoffs and risks, as there are with everything. But it a very clever platform and works quite well.
But why settle for inferior privacy with a microscopic anon set on a permissioned network?
Just swap some Bitcoin to Monero and use it. You aren't "hodling" Monero anyway if you are spending it even if you have SoV issues with Monero. Short term price volatility will be similar for both Bitcoin and Monero.
If what you want is privacy at all costs then nothing even comes close to Monero.
And I've been I Monero user since 2014.
But there are many reasons to use liquid.
Also I think calling liquid a "permissioned network" is very black and white. It's federated. Every design choice has tradeoffs. Moneros privacy makes it harder to verify. Liquids federation increases centralization. But Monero has best in class privacy, and liquid has a lot of advantage because of the model.
Ok, but if the goal is permissionless money, the partiular sacrifices liquid makes don't make sense imo. Especially for the meager privacy you get.
Open to seeing an advantage, but I still don't really see much for using liquid unless you are just worried about slippage/volatility. And in the short term is very minor, virtually non existent, or even a slight profit in your favor half the time so it evens out.
To each their own I guess. Maybe youll find this of interest: https://twitter.com/Truthcoin/status/1689337656319016960
The first open source thing is no longer true as of last month i believe*** (took them long enough 😅)
Ignore the drivechain stuff
Sztorc wow BIP300. And in it he makes the argument that without it people will use (other coins like) Monero in the actual BIP.
"Today, coins such as Namecoin, Monero, ZCash, and Sia, offer features that Bitcoiners cannot access -- not without selling their BTC to invest in a rival monetary unit. "
I see his arguments against liquid as a bit biased. And in the end, yes, liquid introduced trust. Trust in blockstream, the federation and that code. Also elements is open source and so is the liquid node s/w.
I am not here to say that liquid is better than Monero for privacy. Not even close. And it could only get good enough at privacy to be usable if a lot more people used it. And I'm not thinking that liquid should be thought of as a pure extension to bitcoin. But like lightning uses Bitcoin as the final settlement layer for what it does. I think it's possible that the trade-offs in liquid could end up being very valuable for people who choose to use that side chain.
I only hold a lot of two crypto assets. Bitcoin and Monero. I hold a trivial amount of liquid. As well as a small amount of lightning BTC which is also attacked as being "not really Bitcoin" frequently.
Well it’s possible to clone a drivechain to exact specifications as Monero.
On drivechain.info you can download the software and already play around with z-cash which is meant to be better privacy.
The only difference being instead of Monero consensus’s mechanism, they use bitcoin merged mining and of course btc is native currency.
What’s funny if you read the z-cash forums is that they really hate drivechain because their dev took 3+ years to get it to a completely trustless state. And it took drivechain two minutes to clone the code into a bitcoin sidechain 😂
I agree the trades offs are different but I think many altcoin projects are threatened by drivechain for this reason alone. All their hard work can just be copied and pasted onto a sidechain.
Yes, I understand you can copy the privacy technicals to be exactly like Monero. But the underlying mechanics and incentives would be different since it is an L2 drivechain. And you would have to get all Monero markets/businesses/users to switch over which seems like a tall order.
Zcash sender privacy *tech* is better for sure I think you guys should use something similar. It's the governance, dev taxes, etc around Zcash that is trash. Monero is heading down the full membership proofs paths which will finally do away with it's weakest privacy layer: ring signatures.
Lmao @ the Zcash forum salt. Isn't this the point of FOSS? Incentives to build on other work and improve each other?
I'm not threatened, if drivechains turn out better and people adopt it I will use it. But whether for good or bad I just don't see it happening because of how controversial it has been.
I agree it won’t happen overnight. Monero has strong network effects in certain places online.
But I think on time bitcoins network effects will far exceed.
It’s similar to languages work. Why does everyone in the west speak English? Well if you want to do commerce you need the dollar so you need some English to make the trade.
I think if everyone has bitcoin, eventually everyone will expect you to have bitcoin for commerce if hyperbitcoinizationnever plays out.
Sorry my fat thumbs and damus app is buggy. I hope my reply makes sense.
You on TestFlight ? Looking for bugs…
😁
Funny thing about this story.
They can’t kill it. 
I would consider Drivechains different to Bitcoin in a certain sense so doesn't carry L1 network effects imo.
For example: lightning and on chain bitcoin. People say they are the same. But just because you accept bitcoin doesnt mean you accept lightning. In fact, far more users/businesses/markets accept on chain Bitcoin. It's doesn't inherit on chain network effects if that makes sense. Same thing with Liquid, Ecash, etc.
I think any new thing like drivechains has to start from scratch.
Monero has the "privacy coin" market cornered. Bitcoin can't fullfill that niche currently and any new layer would have to gather it's own network effect. It would be exceedingly difficult.
One thing about monero.... the tech could be duplicatedbon a L2 DC of course, but
Part of monero is Anti-asic randomx. A DC version would be going backwards to Asic mined security.
Fair I guess dc won’t eradicate altcoins but will end the excuse to create altcoins.
I think it, DC, will eradicate them over time for sure. But to remove XMR's argument for Asic resistance, we would need something like stratumV or other tech that guards Miner centralization.
Ring sigs and bullet proofs in Monero, are unnessary with a straight forward Zside on DC.
Agree. Zcash tech is better for sender privacy and should be used instead (or something similar). If implemented in a DC and adopted I would use it.
But seems like it's such a long shot in my opinion... By the time this happens, if it ever does, Monero will already be that much further along since it is also constantly being improved. Seraphis full membership proofs will obsolete ring sigs. It is already being actively developed by Koe and other Monero devs for some time now. Maybe 2+ years or so away. Which isn't very long.
There is an additional uphill battle. Just as lightning/liquid adoption struggles vs on chain Bitcoin - DC would have to build it's own network effect from scratch.
Monero is a project i like and respect very much. It is the easiest currency to use privately or just in general for normal use. With a feather wallet it is a better experience than metamask, and several other networks.
It also has a bug at its core so serious no one talks about what it is, in detail: OSPEAD
The solution to Ospead may entail something hat damages what we think monero is.( It may need a key ceremony like ethereum.) Because of oversights and inexperience by early devs. Ospead is on the roadmap btw.
Bitcoin is far ahead of monero in that it has more eyes and capital searching for problems like Ospead.
A DC sidechain inherits all this work on bitcoin, all this liquidity and exit ability.
Sidechains also inherit bitcoin network affect. Wallets, after bip300 can "simply" add the zside chain already created to mimic Zcash. A "send using zside" option is easy.
All the current popular wallets WoS, Electrum, Atomic ect, have to simply add this as a security default or "mix" option.
It's the network gain similar to starting your own messaging app with a new function from scratch, such as push-to-talk, versus just adding it to What's App.
This is called a warm market, in business.
Seraphis and many other updates are band-aid solutions to the shortcomings of Monero AND Bitcoin. With DC and bip300, those go away.
Randomx is Monero's last claim to fame in a post Drivechain bitcoin world.
RandomX loses out to saturnV or a better mining decentralization solution (if possible)
Again, i deeply appreciate Monero and the community and their values.
Yes, I agree with you about OSPEAD is what I am speaking of the relative weakness of ring signatures for sender privacy (...though in practice this has been robust enough for now. There has never been any busts or criminal trials because ring signatures were broken)
The only disagreement I have is that DC automatically inherits all Bitcoins eyes/capital/network effect.
We can clearly see this is not true in the community split and controversy. DCers are the minority. There is huge resistance.
We can also see L2s like Lightning and Liquid that have been around for sometime already and only have a tiny fraction of Bitcoin onchain adoption. Just because you accept Bitcoin onchain doesn't mean you accept lightning or liquid. More likely than not you dont.
I'm curious why you think Seraphis is a bandaid? Are you speaking of the initial large increase in ring size (128)? Then I agree that is a temporary bandaid. Though I was specifically referring to full membership proofs that will come after. It is essentially the same ZK proof as Zcash. It is not effected by OSPEAD afaik.
From my understanding of Ospead, seraphis is not meant to fix it. The fix and problem itself has not even been released publicly, because it's so central to the way Monero was designed. That's kind of scary if you think about it. Nothing about bitcoin or its flaws are hidden.
FMP in xmr is a band aid solution because it is further closing a wound caused by monero ring sigs, continually increasing the size of rings. Maybe stiches is a better term. Its going to be great, but its playing catch up to a problem zcash does not have. (A default privacy z cash anyways)
Zk does not rely on full or partial rings to hide or create an anon set, so a dc zside is a different approach entirely. Since it has the entry and exit of bitcoin it would have all of bitcoin as an anonimity "crowd" to hide in, versus Monero much smaller one.
Ok, i appreciate your point about the slow adoption of DC.
Optimist like myself believe that unlike Liquid or Lightning, Drivechains are a much simpler ecosystem to deploy.
One op code gives you the ability to recreate free market conditions and innovation.
In other words, Liquid is like the Italian papal states. Lighting is Renaisance Europe. Very, litigious, very complicated and incompatible laws, custodial money in the case of Liquid.
They are not appropriate comparisons to what DC will do or can be simply because DC is early Capitalist America, compared to them. The hidden hand of the market is more powerful than Blockstream or the pet project of engineering Nerds.
The lack of demand for those two projects you mention are incomparble. Apples and oranges. Liquid requires multisig, trust. Lightning is a mess and has entirely different incentives and goals.
Appreciate the diologue
The way I understand Monero's ring signatures weakness (sender privacy) is from sophisticated statistical attacks (because it is the only part that is not hidden, only obscured). OSPEAD was started to find the best way to optimize how decouys are chosen, and thus diminish these kinds of attacks (still in progress it seems).
Now you honestly got me thinking I have misunderstood Seraphis somewhere (and maybe I did)...to my knowledge Full Membership Proofs greatly diminishes this statistical attack relative to the current state of things, but I see you might be correct that it is a different approach and not a complete solution to the problem.
This is a good article that explains it succintly: https://localmonero.co/knowledge/seraphis-for-monero
Great analogies 🙂
I guess we will have to wait and see what happens with DCs. I'm somewhat neutral, mostly because I don't know enough. But a lot of maxis seem to loathe the idea of it, so it seems like it is in for a rough fight.
"Notice the change here: linkable ring signatures are replaced with a combination of membership proofs and authorizing proofs. Roughly speaking, membership proofs show that a consumed output is part of a larger set, similar to what happens in RingCT. But unlike RingCT, membership proofs don't involve the linking tag at all! Authorizing proofs show that the linking tag is valid and are used to sign the final transaction."
https://localmonero.co/knowledge/seraphis-for-monero?language=en
As you say, competition brings innovation. I will use any coin that allows me to send and receive funds freely. As crypto evolves I will drop the coins that don't work and adopt the best ones, continually.
It’s a free protocol, if they wanna build it let them do their thing.
love XMR, and it being the most private crypto coin why is not implemented here?, in a private environment, almost seems contradictory (english is not my first language so pardon any grammar error)
Me too but I prefer bitcoin. Nostr is a place for a free market ideas. Devs are free to build and users are free to use.
All I am saying is with drivechain bitcoin becomes more competitive by enabling monero level privacy.
MFW I see someone advocating for a soft fork to create federations run by miners instead of just creating their own federation without a soft fork. 
We trust miners for layer 1 transactions already. It’s only logical to trust them for layer 2 transactions.
Proof of work over custodianship any day for me.
Couple of things:
1. I trust economic incentives, not miners. The inherent uncertainty around changing those economic incentives is in large part the root of my dislike for this proposal.
2. Drivechains are still custodianship, just from an indefinite and dispersed group. You haven’t solved the peg out issue by tossing it to miners and please don’t pretend you have. Also if I’m going to have to trust a custodian I’d rather know specifically who they are rather than just “the miners”.
I recognize the need for scaling solutions, but this one ain’t it.
Whole point of blind merge mining is that it’s trusting economic incentives. Bitcoin Miners care about maximising profits and the longevity of the bitcoin network more than any other entity in the bitcoin community. If they don’t they get out competes by more efficient miners.
If bitcoin was so good why would you need a 2nd layer that centralizes the whole network, you lose your money after a while and you might not be able to find a path to the recipient?
Mining causes centralisation. Okay sure dude.
No, using a big lightning node causes centralisation
Sounds like Wallet of Satoshi.
Well, you are using it so you are not really helping