Replying to Avatar preston

Drivechains

Alright people, we are playing a game of chess here. The one thing, the absolute one thing, we can't do is give up the king. To give up the king, in my humble opinion, is to mess up the base layer. This mistake would disrupt the delicate incentive structure that ensures sound money. That sound money pegs the extremely fragile credit markets and out-of-control G7 policymakers that are creating clown world with their CB fiat policies.

We don’t need the sound, pegged, money to move fast, we don’t need the money to do smart swoopty things, we just need it to be pegged, immutable, and digitally sailable to actually stop the madness of clown world.

By introducing a whole lot of technical complexity to the base layer and potentially screwing with the incentives all so we can connect to a bunch of centralized shitcoin projects is like playing offense with the king when you’re down 7 pieces and the other player still has their entire back row at their disposal.

A. Why the rush!?

B. Why not just go use Monero if you need that level of anominity in your transactions. Why do you have to have it in a wrapper via drivechains?

C. Why risk the king without deep understanding and testing of the technical risk and potential change to incentives?

The beauty of Bitcoin is you can build it and softfork it, and we’ll let the community vote with their nodes. BUT, I for one, have no use for drivechains (that doesn’t mean everyone is like me). And as a result, I will not be updating my node and running any attempted “secret” softfork updates by the miners.

Please help me understand the risks better. All I’m hearing at the moment is that people don’t want sidechains to use BTC as a native currency. How that negatively impacts bitcoin is unclear.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

We don't want #sidechains filling the Bitcoin #blockchain with a lot of garbage that adds expense and security risk to owners of #Bitcoin, and to the #fullnodes. Fullnodes are the linchpins of Bitcoin..💣

I agree with that, but from what I’ve read, that wouldn’t happen. What happens in the drive chains stays in the drivechains?

This was the problem with inscriptions. That they could add data to the base chain. My understanding is that this isn’t a problem with drivechains. If you have a link to how that’s not true, I would love to read it.

Thank you. This was helpful.

Need to think about it more, but my initial impression is that the proposal is complicated and inelegant.

Seems to require a lot of trust in miners to do the right thing. Not clear that the proposal will work as intended and won’t have unintended consequences.

Agree