Subnostr

The arguments I can see against #BIP300 so far:

1) #Drivechain will strongly be associated with the #Bitcoin brand. Something bad happening in a drivechain (hack, scam) would reflect poorly on the #BTC brand.

2) Drivechains could siphon liquidity from the base layer. A drivechain’s token may attract more liquidity than BTC.

3) Drivechains could introduce regulatory risks. If a drivechain isn’t decentralized or is deemed non-compliant, it could help authorities to make the case for regulating Bitcoin.

4) Drivechains haven’t been properly reviewed and tested yet. There is no rush to deploy them.

#Blockchain #Crypto

Sovereign Matt 2y ago

(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.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

LogicallyMinded 2y ago

(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

Sovereign Matt 2y ago

(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.