anything-chain is a hard pass
best thing we have now for L2 is state channels, they actually work, they are just kinda fragile and rigid
1999 era practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance is what most "sidechains" are gonna run on and Cosmos proved over several years trying that you can't push that past about 100 nodes without going over 5 seconds per block, and NOBODY, not avalanche, not solana, nobody has surprased this ...1999 era technology, which satoshi innovated upon for a very narrow use case
been studying this tech for 12 years, anyone who thinks anything chains are useful is an idiot
oh yeah, blockchains in nostr for replaceable events would be useful nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qguwaehxw309a5x7ervvfhkgtnrdaexzcmvv5h8gmm0d3ej7qg6waehxw309ac8junpd45kgtnxd9shg6npvchxxmmd9uqsuamnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dshsqgyhcu9ygdn2v56uz3dnx0uh865xmlwz675emfsccsxxguz6mx8rygq46yvm lol
Bleh, I typically agree with the notion that scaling blockchains with blockchains doesn’t end well, but I’m happy to be an idiot if bitvm2 can improve some trust assumptions here
Personally more interested in it working in systems like zkCoins, not alt blockchains
WRT cometbft, depends on the implementation. Can be useful in the context of a specific function within tx lifecycle eg soft finality mechanism // data storage
I’m really annoyed that I’m not in Riga.
Not a huge fan of “we did it first” but this might be the first podcast on BitVM2?
I chatted with Alexei Zamyatin, one of the paper’s co-authors, about BitVM2, BitVM Bridge, and how it can support better sidechains. Check it out!
Feedback also welcome. New-ish to hosting podcast-style discussions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOlPZ0o1UEY
Interesting few days.
- We wrote a review on the ICP subnet that manages its Bitcoin-synthetic
- Most people were like, yeah, fair enough
- Some people accused of being paid to write a hit piece on ICP
- Then they all ganged up on us
- I was like "wtf?"
- Then the ICP devs were like "yeah, everything they wrote is true"
Everyone is still mad lmao
we are currently getting yelled at by the latter group here
Maxis yell at us for writing about shitcoins. Shitcoiners yell at us for writing about their shitcoin.
Comfy
We did a review on ICP. They call themselves a Bitcoin L2 in some marketing stuff.
Tl;dr is that they have a blockchain of 28 nodes managing their BTC multisig and sidechain. Some other depedencies, but this is the main trust assumption.
It takes 10 of the 28 nodes to collude and steal user funds.
Review here: https://www.bitcoinlayers.org/layers/internetcomputer
I’m not too sure! Will check it out
The Bitcoinlayers.org project has added new contributors and an advisor to support the project 🧡
Some bitcoinlayers.org product updates underway:
Added a snapshot to risk icons in the home page. This way users can hover over the icons and see what they mean. We’ll add the specific icon next to risk category heading to ensure ppl know what they mean…
Also planning on adding some sorting mechanism and new definitions
This will see low risk L2s (e.g. Lightning) appear at the top of the page, followed by sidechains (liquid, rootstock), then remora chains (e.g. Stacks, Core), then stuff that is not really connected to Bitcoin, but is more of an appchain (eg BOB).
Now, does the ordering above make one chain more secure than the other? Not necessarily. It’s more of highlighting mechanisms that are bitcoin aligned versus others that aren’t.
We’ll get this done within next 10 business days. 
latest “L2” we’re reviewing just rebranded, replaced its old token with a new one, and is using a synthetic btc token for gas
it’s literally the same node software lol
this is cool I don’t have to be nice about Bitcoin “L2s” on here