Subnostr

Sorry but I’m not buying the Primal outrage. Either you are ok with their trending feed (an algorithm you DON’T control by definition that is going to include whatever filtering they see fit) or you aren’t ok with it and choose not to use it.

If you want to use nostr without algos like you claim you do, you are absolutely unaffected by any of this.

7c

nobody 2y ago

A lot of people are struggling with the concept of 'freedom' today.

Nostr was created and functions to be a maximally 'free' protocol. Where users could choose which relays and clients to build and use. Etc. It doesn't mean free of what YOU don't like. It means highly customizable and censorship resistant from big powers.

Anyone saying *their opinion of what a nostr tool should be or not be is missing the whole point. Don't like it? Don't use it.

#Freedom #Libertad

nostr:nevent1qqsvjjvm39z5xn72l5jtlq6t03acz3amyd0fv4tgl542k59rfrrdpuqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygpass40an279ylj3dnz0yehqj3lhr8p2w4fr4us4vgldf6j639y95psgqqqqqqsjgq9kc

Replying to

Cyber Seagull

It does the opposite. It opens one gate to funnel an attack through. An attack you can see for months down the line and prepare for.

Right now, we do not know where any attack might come from. We can keep handwaving away competing projects up until one kicks us in the nuts, or some internal error or consiete undoes BTC.

RGB is great for example, but it is playing catch up with all the proof of concept and market/brain/money theft Eth has taken away in the interim.

Drivechain allows us to experiment with any new proposal, keep core safe and say to any other project "we can do that,but better".

it is a moat around bitcoin that allows a strategic drawbridge

7c

nobody 2y ago

I appreciate the response and viewpoint. Keeping Bitcoin simple has ossified it though. Purposely, it has limited the attack surfaces. Which is why it's the hardest money ever created. Without this security, Bitcoin has nothing.

I think no blockchain could 'compete' with it due to a multitude of reasons but its due mostly because core and the idea of what core should be, is simple.

Usually the first ideas of innovation are the best.

This is where it's strength lies. It's simple, secure and it works as being the hardest money EVER.

Ethereum, Solana etc think, mistakenly, they do better things than Bitcoin. But they don't. Their L1's are not as robust and secure.

To me the ultimate test is there's nothing stopping any group from locking or holding Bitcoins up to be pegged in to a sidechain. It's like placing gold in a vault.

Drivechain sounds like it wants to melt the gold, invite the metal smith's into the plant and create alloys that might blow the whole thing up.

I don't understand the code of drivechain to evaluate the widening of the attack surface. But my question would be, for anyone, ethereum, monero, solana are hoping to be Swiss army knives while Bitcoin is a Katana. How do you justify whittling away the katana to add a corkscrew?

Replying to

Luke Dashjr

* With the current state of mining centralisation, IMO it would be pretty dumb to send any bitcoins to a drivechain. There are better ways to burn bitcoins or donate to miners.

* But it's not my place to dictate what you can/can't do with your bitcoins, so if there's sufficient community support for drivechains, it should be available for those who want to use them.

* Drivechains were arguably a good idea back in 2017 with the risk of bcash splitting off, but that ship sailed a long time ago. I don't think there's a point now.

* Yes, L2L is funding my work on drivechain code. The code/PR is not an endorsement of drivechains. Many Bitcoin devs receive funding for their work. This is not substantially different.

7c

nobody 2y ago

No one saw nor predicted Ordinals when Taproot was proposed and adopted. And look how controversial its been and, in fairness, it's not even "nefarious".

Drivechain seems like it opens attack vectors and surfaces for nefarious things that we may not predict nor calculate now.

I'm not against change. But preserving and securing Bitcoin's Layer 1 is... everything.

Federated sidechains do, essentially, the same thing as a Drive chain, except this way it preserves the base layer.

This is my current view and I'm not overly tied to it but zooming bitcoins in and out of the base layer seems like a large attack vector and changes the mining landscape.

Which, Satoshi intended to be more distributed and pleb based than it became. Miners have a LOT of influence and IMO it's not exactly always a positive. This is why Monero tried to make mining unprofitable and distributed. This always made some sense to me in theory.

Thoughts?

Replying to nobody

Thanks for pointing this out! I used to think Liquid was as bad as an alt coin/blockchain and that the Jade/Green multi-sig was shady.

But as I learned more my perspectives totally shifted...

I appreciate the view you're coming from. Yes, trust is antithetical to Bitcoin. And giving over any trust should always be done extremely carefully. But there really isn't anything at 'absolute' zero trust. And getting to such a point is increasingly difficult the less tech savy one is. Exchanges, operating systems, hardware wallets, running software, running firmware, running kernels on your internet connection, running your laptop etc etc. It's technically challenging to eliminate all trust. Yet we ought to try.

So... I appreciate that Liquid is at least transparent about its self to a high degree. It's an 11/15 sig trusted, federated side chain. Private, quick transactions, no KYC, low fees. And now this Watchmen is FOSS too and they do AMAs. Ok. Not bad.

Yes, there is some trust involved here. And like the gold confiscation you pointed to, anytime you don't 100% own your keys outright, you're upping risk.

But Liquid offers some attractive features for those *wanting and comfortable* with its risks. I think more and more federated sidechains will pop up in the future. Adam seems like he has a good reputation and isn't making Liquid to be anything It's not. So I'm good with that.

Like lots of things in life... some things require cold storage, some lukewarm storage and others hot storage is fine.

The BIP300 drivechain IMO creates an attack vector/surface for future ill intentions and is far more risky than some sidechain.

Think... no one saw ordinals coming from Taproot. And they aren't exactly even nefarious. Now imagine what zooming coins in and out of the main chain might open up that we can't currently predict.

Liquid isn't a replacement for L1. It's just a lukewarm storage option with some features.

7c

nobody 2y ago

Thoughts? For anyone who's awake and willing. Re: Drivechain BIP300 vs Sidechains, and Liquid's Watchmen FOSS backdoor.

nostr:nevent1qqsqyj0zkd7zzwrfcx8yzxptzpkh29xj5qh0vfphnx06pkt58n8hqygprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68y6ty9e3k7mf0qgs8c4un9r8eq29y2jx4z9a05nuyfra4zr9fqgl4w6mmey8ut0nvulsrqsqqqqqpfzmn2z

Replying to

Gildong.Hong

Did you know that there is a backdoor on Liquid and bLoCKsTreAm is able to access it?

"all signing keys are backed up and encrypted to both Blockstream and ... "

"The Liquid emergency keys are held offline by non-overlapping components of Blockstream ..."

#liquidisrespector

https://void.cat/d/TtQazw4TgotEy6gjPMmcme.webp

https://blockstream.com/assets/downloads/pdf/liquid-whitepaper.pdf

nostr:note1uukxt34p4v8s05w30ztr3qu3hxnll6xvhkqh8hmwjsxfnfna3whs7gq2mv