Nothing. I need the comfort of an echo chamber or the warm embrace of a cult to go on.
* Due to political reasons, the Center was closed in 2001.
Bitcoin fixes this
I mispoke here, the signing by hashpower is for an on chain transaction, for example pegging out from the side chain to main. But this process is a simple poll vote by miners over time. 51% or more of global hash dominance has no bearing on who gets to vote or how much their vote is valued. The FAQ describes it better.
Within the sidechain. Not main.
Notice the single quotes on either side of that word "signed" ? In the github version they are solid double quotes. Meaning, something like or similar to.
Bip300 does not sign a transaction the way you or several people use your keys to sign a transaction.
It's a vote over time ON THE SIDECHAIN, that some txn is valid. It's like saying changing from single round voting to 3 rounds of voting in a small town election, changes the outcome of national presidential election.
Bip300 ads one new Op code, with sidechain parameters and no mainchain affects for people not participating in it. It does not increase the number of bitcoins, it does not change the turing incompleteness of bitcoin script or break anything on chain.
It's going to happen, if you don't get it at this point i've spent enough time explaining, and wish you the best.
Basicly you mean: what if a mining pool has 70% control of a specific sidechain using bip 301 to secure its sidechain transactions.
And then that pool starts validating false transactions on the sidechain that pay them more fees.
Correct ?
That's not how a Drivechain softfork would work though. It does not add some new ability to both hack the sidechain and give more power to do a 51% attack than already exists. It uses tools that already exist on bitcoin: merged mining, script contracts, miner fees. Lightning and liquid are both softforks that are as vulnerable to 51% and in the same ways as DC. DC democratizes Liquid and simplifies lightning (BMM no need for a seperate node).
Either these two projects and their vulnerabilites are useful, or they are an existential risk to Bitcoin.
Either Or.
Not
Either Or And Drivechain is bad.
In boolean terms.
Nothing is payed out of the DC hashrate escrow, besides regular main chain fees for a regular utxo. Fees payed to miners in Bip 301 (the other DC bip, NOT hash escrow) are different. I will not describe them here as this clarification reply from you question is not related.
>But to drain a sidechain, no history rewriting is necessary, just regular, profitable, forward mining. [By a 51%].
Ok, this is a little more clear.
Traditional 51% attack from the bitcoin wiki:
An attacker that controls more than 50% of the network's computing power can, **->for the time that he is in control,<--** exclude and modify the --->[forward] ordering of transactions. This allows him to:
Reverse transactions that he sends ---> while he's in control<---. This has the potential toĀ double-spend transactionsĀ that previously had already been seen in the block chain, affecting all coins that share a history with the reversed transaction
Reverse confirmations for any transaction that had previously been seen in the block chain ---->while heās in control.<-----
Prevent some or all transactions from gaining any confirmations [forward]
Prevent some or all other miners from mining any valid blocks
The attackerĀ can't:
Reverse other people's transactions without their cooperation (unless their coin history has been affected by a double-spend)
Prevent transactions from being sent at all (they'll show as 0/unconfirmed) [Drivechain M6]
Change the number of coins generated per block
Create coins out of thin air
Send coins that never belonged to him [DriveChain M6]
End
Validation of what ? Let's use the EthSide on Dc chain as an example. Let's say you the user wants to withdraw from ethside back to main. Ethside happens not to use BMM, in this example, so nothing has ever or will ever be validated by a miner on the sidechain for security or anything.
You initiate a withdraw. 3-6 months later the Bundle hash goes through. You get your utxo. Where along this path, this user journey, is a unique atrack vector to Drivechain that does not exist for any other aspect of bitcoin.
From Bip 300:
What are Bundles?
Sidechain withdrawals take the form of "Bundles" -- named because they "bundle up" many individual withdrawal-requests into a single rare layer1 transaction.
Sidechain full nodes aggregate the withdrawal-requests into a big set. The sidechain calculates what M6 would have to look like, to pay all of these withdrawal-requests out. Finally, the sidechain calculates what the hash of this M6 would be. This 32-byte hash identifies the Bundle.
This 32-byte hash is what miners will be slowly ACKing over 3-6 months, not the M6 itself (nor any sidechain data, of course).
A bundle either pays all its withdrawals out (via M6), or else it fails (and pays nothing out).
Bitcoin with Monero on L2 is like Icecream + sprinkles. Each are great alone, but together elevate eachother.
If you don't want sprinkles, thats ok, its a soft fork, business as usual for you and your regular bitcoin use.
It also creates a way to integrate any possible future bitcoin killer. You can claim none will ever exist, but you can't know that for sure. Paul describes DC as a lifeboat.
entrenched projects with sunk cost dev time are skewing the narative in their favor.
M6 is user/sidechain side initiated. Miners can't just invent awithdrawal out of thin air that will sustain for 3 to 6 months in public.
Even assuming they capture the sidechain or your side chain account and start withdrawing.
A 51% attack on DC is the same as a 51% on main. You keep using the word majority miner, a term for a 51% main chain attacker, but are not showing how DC is so very different a side chain is more vulnerable than any other part of bitcoin.
Why do that ? If they can withdraw your funds from a sidechain using M6 there is no need to also mine the hash, or even be a miner. You have still not answerd the question.
You've basicly just said miners can hack your sidechain account/ wallet and withdraw the money. But this ability has nothing to do with them being miners. It's like saying your internet provider can hack your email delete your emails, or assign all of them to a new address. There are several privacy and safety barriers between that happening.
What you have done is actually started reading the Bip and its description so i encourage you to keep reading about it, but what you've claimed up to now remains unfounded and groundless.
You haven't answered my question.
Within Bip 300, how are new blocks built forward that coins can be swept into.
How exactly does bip300 do this.
How and what is this different category ?
Is it through bip300 or 301 ?
what if i told you drivechain allows trying out 119 without any downside to main