(1) Right but if #drivechain aren’t implemented, nothing bad will happen to them which keeps the #Bitcoin brand safe from any backlash. I think this argument still stands.

(2) I don’t see how you’re addressing the argument here. #BTC is the most liquid #crypto to date. A better crypto on a drivechain could reduce new liquidity and fragment existing liquidity for BTC.

(3) This argument is related to (1) as something bad happening on a drivechain could be spark needed for governments to push the narrative that Bitcoin needs more regulations (because it is not as decentralized as initially thought or it allows money laundering through a private drivechain).

(4) It seems like a strong counter-argument.

#Bip300 #Blockchain

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

(1) Same thing could be said about Taro, Ordinals, Coloured coins, Inscriptions, Counterparty, BRC-20 tokens etc.

(2) It will be bitcoin on another sidechain. It won’t be an alt coin.

(3) Fair concern but feels quite statist to me. Bitocin was created by cypherpunks, permisionless and free market philosophy. If we give up on the pursuit of privacy over fears of the state then we are just cowardly obeying the state by default.

(4) Federated merge mined sidechain vs hash rate escrow sidechain. Seem similar in many ways to me but instead of trusted 15 member multisig you trust the miners to be profit seeking.