one of the main arguments for drivechains, from the author himself, is that it would anchor shitcoins onto the bitcoin network, defending bitcoin from being overtaken by some future superior chain with better features.

this argument is naive at best but feels more like fear mongering than anything else. I think Proof of Work with a fair distribution and no issuer was the real innovation here, and that’s not something you recreate today for a variety of reasons.

Bitcoin doesn’t need shitcoins, shitcoins need Bitcoin.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

At least he admits it's pure shitcoinery

This argument is false. It's about allows new Blockchain technologies using bitcoin as currency without needing to create a shitcoins.

Your #shitcoin problem is YOUR! problem. Not #Bitcoins problem..😠

Later in that interview that gave you the heebie jeebies dude said he created drive chains in order to tie his crypto prediction markets to bitcoin.

We have a saying in #Bitcoin. "Whatever replaces Bitcoin will be called Bitcoin" lol.

Just something to think about and comprehend..😆🤭🧡👑🗽

Who is this “we” you think you’re a part of and we aren’t? 🤓

I've been very clear about who I am. I'm #Bitcoin. "We" are the #virtuous #fullnodes and Bitcoin #loyalist.

All these would-be traitor's talking about #drivechains etc aren't Bitcoin. Fuck them lol.

I live to plunge my sword deep through their entrails. I'm Bitcoin. Not Shitcoin..🧡👑🗽😁

nvm. i don’t actually care 😏