From what I can tell - Drivechain might make miners more money and we don't know what they'll do with it.... Drivechains enable other things to be built on Bitcoin, that could be bad.... Drivechains are too complex because I am not a developer therefore they are scary and bad.

But it honestly is starting to seem more like subconscious protection of the LN related investments or some weird fears of the unknown with regards to the SEC claiming any namable entity who builds anything new on the protocol automatically renders it a security idk...

I don't see the drivechain critics talk bad about CTV or recursive covenants (in regards to complexity and potential for unforseen consequences...)

Sidechains cant have BTC as a native currency. They all are their own token even if named similarly and with 1 for 1 pegging like Liquid or anything else built with Elements. Drivechain is a different approach than peg-in/out that Liquid uses but it still has a process to get into and out of that sidechain. But instead of dealing with a discreet federation, its vetted by miners via hashrate escrows. Theres a limit of 256 slots making them rare and they can only be facilitated by miners. A normal user can not make or manage their own sidechain with drivechain. Its a centralized permissioned protocol.

Good luck fellow traveler. The exact issues ellude me as well, but in general its always best to err on the side of not changing bitcoin because you never know how it will turn out. Unlike centralized systems, we have no reset switch.

Yes they can. It will be a relatively simple change in the code to divide satoshis to 16 decimal places instead of 8.

The first rule of bitcoin is don't break bitcoin.

The second rule of bitcoin is don't break bitcoin.

The third rule of bitcoin is don't break bitcoin.

The fourth rule of bitcoin is try to conservatively improve it where possible.

One of the biggest risks in any engineering project is the problem of over-engineering and adding more and more complexity until the design gets bogged down.

Cut a pizza into as many slices as you like, the amount of pizza still doesn't change.

Drivechains

Alright people, we are playing a game of chess here. The one thing, the absolute one thing, we can't do is give up the king. To give up the king, in my humble opinion, is to mess up the base layer. This mistake would disrupt the delicate incentive structure that ensures sound money. That sound money pegs the extremely fragile credit markets and out-of-control G7 policymakers that are creating clown world with their CB fiat policies.

We don’t need the sound, pegged, money to move fast, we don’t need the money to do smart swoopty things, we just need it to be pegged, immutable, and digitally sailable to actually stop the madness of clown world.

By introducing a whole lot of technical complexity to the base layer and potentially screwing with the incentives all so we can connect to a bunch of centralized shitcoin projects is like playing offense with the king when you’re down 7 pieces and the other player still has their entire back row at their disposal.

A. Why the rush!?

B. Why not just go use Monero if you need that level of anominity in your transactions. Why do you have to have it in a wrapper via drivechains?

C. Why risk the king without deep understanding and testing of the technical risk and potential change to incentives?

The beauty of Bitcoin is you can build it and softfork it, and we’ll let the community vote with their nodes. BUT, I for one, have no use for drivechains (that doesn’t mean everyone is like me). And as a result, I will not be updating my node and running any attempted “secret” softfork updates by the miners.

And who controls the vetting for the limited number of drivechains that could be supported

Bitcoin doesn’t need “help” from other protocols and projects. Bitcoin needs central bankers to keep going out and adding another 10 trillion units into the system and then handing it out to people for performing no work. And they will…they have to…because the liquidity isn’t flowing into the hands of the broader populace because all the equity has been consolidated into the hands of a couple people. Bitcoin just needs to be left the F alone. The people running clown world are doing all the heavy lifting. “Don’t interrupt your enemy when they’re getting ready to make the same mistake…yet again”.

50 degrees Celsius?

Do we need to fact check?

curious why do you think so, want to learn 💜

Good Morning Nostr 🧡⚡

You might feel like a super hacker man with your secure self sovereign geographically distributed multisig setup. But I can assure you your wife likely won't if you unfortunately find yourself on the wrong end of a bus.

Inheritance matters. Keep it simple stupid.

The recent push for 'multisig the standard' is a dangerous one, but the reasons for which are pretty obvious for anyone with a shred of critical thinking 😆

What are your thoughts?

#AskNostr

Does sparrow wallet have an npub? #asknostr #plebchain #bitcoin

Would be cool to see a baseline pre-covid frequency for news titles with "heart disease" and related terms in it.

The tweet author also says "over the past three years" but then has a tweet with news articles from 2017? Another from 2016? And another from September 2020, when the first US vaccine was only approved in November of that year. Etc.

(Found another tweet with news from over 3 years ago while reviewing)

IMO these types of errors water down the point which I ultimately agree with re: increased likelihood of heart damage. And for young men we know it happens, so becomes hard to hand wave this claim away.