Thats exactly what’s these solutions offer. Keep mainchain untouched, conservative, secure and decentralised.
Scale on layer 2s on sidechains or rollups that come with less security but more functionailiies and scalability.
Discussion
If main chain is not affected by drivechains, it would already have been implemented. Drivechains require a soft fork.
Yep for drivechain to work an opcode is required. Opcode just counts to 13000 blocks to execute sidechain withdrawals.
Because you can peg out from mainchain. The difficult part is securely and trustlessly pegging back into mainchain. This is why the soft fork is needed.
So the main chain is touched. We should be very wary of doing that.
For lightning network to be work, taproot and segwit soft forks were both required which are technically more complex than drivechain opcode.
Lightning was made possible through SegWit, not Taproot.
Taproot only came much later and had unexpected consequences already with the Ordinals spam.
Don't try to have your merge and splurge and purge on Bitcoin. We don't want that and we don't need that. Main chain needs to ossify, any changes to the base layer should be vetted thoroughly and for a very long time. Drivechains won't happen imo.
I swear I read somewhere Taproot was required for BOLTZ 12. But maybe I am wrong on that.
Schnor sigs (bundled with taproot) are required for PTLCs and taproot can make cooperative closes more private. But lightning was working with Segwit, taproot just makes it better
Just seeing this thread again and I feel educated.
Thank you for this discourse. 🥹
Agreed nostr:npub1ykgzq83frx525etgezysqxf25480qrnvp962tvzr9afxzj5yrmyqp3mpsh is a good resource to have in the comment section
Following all you psychos 🫂