Rejection and avoidance of developing over already running layer 2s like lightning, liquid (and RSK), To try and force changes for another seems more like spite
Discussion
"Seems like" is not a technical intuition. Its a feelings based approach. Use your brain and read the spec at drivechain.xyz
Is it better for people to have the choice between plain or chunky tomato sauce ? Yes. Consumer choice isbalways good. DC allows one small op-code addition to allow huge benefits at no risk to people who want vanilla bitcoin.
It doesn't hurt you and moves future changes to layer 2 where you can vote with your money if you want a feature.
Vanilla bitcoin lol. Are you looking to have your bitcoin mow your lawn for you. BTC is hard money.
Here is a break down of what Drivetrain is trying to solve
Drivechain offers several “benefits” 🤡including:
Scalability: Drivechains can help alleviate congestion on the main Bitcoin network by offloading transactions to large-block sidechains i.e. Thunder sidechains.
***Lightning can Solve scalability issues prolly far better then this ever will.****
Flexibility: Developers can experiment with new features and technologies on sidechains without risking harm to Bitcoin mainchain.
****you can already do this. Experiment to your hearts desire on Crypto Blockchains. Bitcoin will experience ZERO harm that way.****
Interoperability: value can be moved seamlessly between Bitcoin sidechains and Bitcoin mainchain, allowing users to use multiple blockchain applications without holding multiple cryptocurrencies.
Yet another made up issue that doesnt need solving.
***You can exchange assets all you want already without holding many of them…..any 20,000+ of them provide nothing useful that bitcoin cant do already other then maybe privacy levels of monero***
Security: Sidechains are economically secured by transaction fees. As a sidechain grows, it becomes stronger.
***Bitcoin is the most secure computer network on the planet. We do not need any form of connection to insecure scam networks.***
The video was basically an ad hominem on paul, suggesting he’s some sort of VC corporate actor, when he’s on Twitter Spaces talking to plebs all the time, and he’s been at this for like eight years. There’s no way that you would characterize this as a “move fast and break things” scenario. completely dishonest. Just an attempt at virtue signaling jumping on the anti-Paul bandwagon.
$3 million is nothing compared to the money being spent trying to promote ETFs and other corporate involvement.