Subnostr

Critics argue that #Drivechain might lead to miners accumulating disproportionate wealth due to MEV… Humm!

Let’s say that Drivechain introduces a unique economic model that aligns with Bitcoin's principles. By enabling miners to operate both the mainchain & sidechain, miners' incentives are more balanced.

Otherwise, Drivechain concept focuses on decentralized mechanisms for sidechain security, potentially reducing MEV by decentralizing the processing of transactions. Drivechain's design can mitigate MEV issues that have been highlighted in Ethereum's context.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

TKay 2y ago

I am not against the idea, but the implementation still feels not ready enough.

We still need to search for the simplest form of this idea.

MichZ 2y ago

I’m going to offer advance reader copies of my new book using digital objects such as these. Build it and we will use it.

Micah541 2y ago

I find the claim that it eliminates infighting immediately incredulous. When has “just give everybody what they want” ever not led to more infighting? Sure, when it starts with a privacy coin and a large block coin it’s all great, but pretty soon we’re arguing which sidechain are appropriate, and miners are now voting, so lobbyists are appealing or bribing miners to get their project approved, or maybe even a negative PR campaign lobbying to confiscate a rival project’s escrow for some crimes against the ecosystem. More options means more surface area.

Komi_Hartman 2y ago

Obviously, it’s important to critically assess any proposed changes to a blockchain system & although it’s true that more options can potentially lead to more conflicts, why couldn’t we look at the considerations & highlight the potential benefits of Drivechain & sidechains, in particular driving innovation & support the growth of 3rd World regions ?

If sidechains can respond to various use cases without having to modify the consensus rules of the mainchain, they could be adapted to specific regions or industries, i.e. different communities or regions of 3rd world, can customize their own sidechains to address financial inclusion, supply chain transparency or identity verification.

Komi_Hartman 2y ago

If the problem of scalability or even the reduction of protocol congestion should be weighed, I find that there could be an improvement in the scalability of the blockchain by unloading part of the transactional load on separate chains. This can also contribute to the reduction of mainchain congestion, the growth in the use of the blockchain & therefore lead to faster & more reliable transactions in these 3rd world regions with limited Internet connectivity & higher latency so where demand for low-cost & efficient transactions is important, further, economic growth & job creation...

So, it would be better to conceive this change by focusing on the positive impacts of innovation & personalization, not the fact that it can benefit maxis or anything else evoking a contentious vote or indexing miners.

Micah541 2y ago

I’m not against scaling here I’m just objecting to the claim that this would eliminate infighting.