Who’s running #wayland? Worth the switch? #linuxstr

What do you thinking of my new glasses 🤓

NEW - U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) has contracted a NY-based AI firm to deploy "Argus", a system to detect and "neutralize" real-time "disinformation threats" on social media.

I went on a date.

Wish me luck.

Yes that's right. The risk is the tradeoff made to allow drivechains to scale better than lightning.

You are wrong to think there is a flaw. Every second layer has tradeoffs. You sound like bsv people that say lightning is "fundementally flawed" because it requires wallets to be hot, or peers to be online to receive, or inbound liquidity.

The fact is all layer twos will have tradeoffs.

I never said drivechains was trustless. Just that you can peg out without mainchain nodes validating.

Yes, that'drivechains. Layer one nodes don't need to validate the pegout

We are redesigning the Primal phone feed. One of our goals is to optimize for information density. The current design is probably too sparse. Here are some concepts we are throwing around. Thoughts?

i think the anti-BIP300 arguments get too convoluted (51% attacks, MEV?, creates miner centralisation).

keep it simple- the game theory of it fails. economically, miners are overwhelmingly incentivised to steal. i believe any meaningful amount of drivechain TVL will be stolen by miners voting for a WT^ transaction that splits the escrow by pool % hashpower- no offchain coordination required.

why turn bitcoin into a laughing stock?

get it activated on litecoin, shorten the withdraw period and wait for the ltc held by miners to get above $50m. watch it get stolen within 3-6 months nostr:note1x3wpe79grs5zmpk3ua3qnxgtjvhf0fh82sl6chekcflaeqd49y5qqpqqu6

This falls into the "I don't want to use it" category.

No one is forcing you to buy in to a sidechain.

Nothing changes for you with DC.

If someone thinks the risk of a miner stealing is worth the risk for features they like, that is part of their risk profile.

If bitcoin is about freedom, but not this opt-in minimal change that increases freedom, why be against it.

It's the equivalent of telling your neighbors they can't enjoy chocolate icecream because the store they bought it at my steal it, and just as unlikely once you understand the "miners can steal meme " is baseless.

Second, the only way to have a trustless pegout would be for nodes to verify the sidechain rules. This would kill decentralization. Trusting the miners with the peg out is a simple solution that has good tradeoffs (svp wallet users (the majority of Bitcoin users) already trust the miners). So to say that the lack of a trustless pegout is a problem is also wrong.

First, it's a real problem with plenty of demand. I want zkp privacy for my bitcoin. I want to stop losing people like Jeremy Rubin and Joseph Poon because forks are too hard (we could already have a ctv drivechain). And more things besides that. So to say there's no demand is wrong.

That's your Opinion.

Bullbitcoin likes them, and they have an important and useful product for their users.

I happen to think miniature scale replicas are a silly hobby. I think second life is a waste of time. The consumers of those disagree.

Also, since some of your objections and understanding of the topic are falling through, i recommend you consider the FAQ and years of research on the topic, based on your name.

Drivechain is insurance against a black swan event that is negative for bitcoin.

That's not how bip300 works.

Miner votes are confs, not permissions.

Does liquid solve a problen for someone ?

If liquid solves a problem for even one person, then DC has found what itncan solve and does not need to go looking very far.

>lack of trustless peg out

What do you mean by this, specifically. What part of bip300 requires a trusted peg out ?