existing drivechain / sidechain / HTLC LN - none can modify or has impact on mainnet till now.

not sure IF BIP300 will impact that in future.

(1) drivechain is already associated with bitcoin. Merge mining and sidechains scaling has been tied to bitcoin brand since Blockstream released their white paper on bitcoin sidechains in 2014.

Regarding point (2) that’s the purpose of sidechains. Keep mainchain unchanged and scale via sidechains.

(3) maybe if mining pools become centralised and owned by pro ESG shareholders. that’s not a risk to drivechain specifically. That’s a concern for bitcoin in general.

(4) Rootstock is a merge mined federated sidechain and has been up and running for 5+ years now with no down time. ~$80 million of bitcoin in TVL currently with 60% of btc miners supporting the chain.

1) Bitcoin brand.

Brands are only rational to be concerned about for centralized businesses and people who have control over their image. What about the christian brand or muslim brand ? What about the gold brand or silver ?

Many people already scoff at the word bitcoin others think it's interesting. If we are basing decisions on branding and perception, let's just increase coin supply and make everyone a bitcoin millionaire.

A faction within bitcoin are into bitcoin for the brand, for the hype and not the tech or financials. These people are not worth consulting on this issue.

2) Liquidity being taken from bitcoin L1

This is already happening. Tether is a downward pressure on bitcoin. Eth and other altcoins are siphoning hash that could be in bitcoin. DC allows those technologies to be on L2 .

DC is OPT-IN. A successful DC L2 means there is a consumer need for it, meeting that need is a good thing. To argue you don't want DC because it might be too good is like saying other people should not be allowed to try on new pants.

Also, L1 will always be there because anything on L2 supports L1 through fees which support the network L1

3) regulation.

Then you are against liquid and blockstream ?Do they pose a regulatory risk to bitcoin because it relies on bip 16 ?

Here is how I would counter these arguments:

(2) Fragmentation of liquidity will happen regardless of whether #drivechain are implemented or not. Actually it has already happened with other #crypto #blockchain syphoning liquidity from #Bitcoin. Even for #BTC maxis, it would be preferable for this liquidity to remain within the Bitcoin ecosystem. To stop liquidity fragmentation, you’ll need to stop innovation in the crypto industry which can’t be done.

(3) Although it may help authorities to make the case to further regulate Bitcoin. Authorities will make a case for more Bitcoin regulations whether or not they can use drivechain to support their narrative. The narrative may be less compelling but no one can stop governmental propaganda and that shouldn’t refrain bitcoiners from innovating.

(4) Some valid point have already been made

(1) I really don’t have a strong argument against this one if not that the damage to the Bitcoin brand would be due to a lack of understanding on how drivechains work but brand perception is all subjective. It won’t be the first time the Bitcoin brand will be under attack and it won’t be the last. Education is a perpetual battle.

#Bip300

Here is how I would counter these arguments:

(2) Fragmentation of liquidity will happen regardless of whether #drivechain are implemented or not. Actually it has already happened with other #crypto #blockchain syphoning liquidity from #Bitcoin. Even for #BTC maxis, it would be preferable for this liquidity to remain within the Bitcoin ecosystem. To stop liquidity fragmentation, you’ll need to stop innovation in the crypto industry which can’t be done.

(3) Although it may help authorities to make the case to further regulate Bitcoin. Authorities will make a case for more Bitcoin regulations whether or not they can use drivechain to support their narrative. The narrative may be less compelling but no one can stop governmental propaganda and that shouldn’t refrain bitcoiners from innovating.

(4) Some valid point have already been made

(1) I really don’t have a strong argument against this one if not that the damage to the Bitcoin brand would be due to a lack of understanding on how drivechains work but brand perception is all subjective. It won’t be the first time the Bitcoin brand will be under attack and it won’t be the last. Education is a perpetual battle.

#Bip300

4) No need to rush. not tested

they have had a test net and test sidechains for years. No one wants to rush it. We want to follow normal good faith procedure as any other bip.

But if the arguments continue to be dumb memes and not technical reasons, miners reserve the right to fork.

Also, how do you know there is no need to rush ? What if something that threatens bitcoin but can be mitigated by DC , is one month away ? Prepparing for emergencies, which DC enables, is rarely a bad thing