Quote from: smoothie on January 03, 2015, 01:13:50 AM

There are so many presumptions about what a pegged side chain to BTC would look like.

That is to presume the security of the SC would be equal or greater than the current BTC master chain. I highly doubt that will ever be the case.

If there was ever equal or greater security on a SC then why not have everyone just switch to the more secure chain?

To peg them and say they are "equal" and coins are transferrable between them makes little sense as one chain will always be more secure or have more infrastructure to support it.

Seems like a broken idea to me.

It is a broken idea, but switching to another chain is either done via proof of burn, two way peg, or a hard fork. Either way it's a serious change. The SC idea isn't that bad an idea, but in the end, they would probably lead to more security issue due to added complexity. If it can be done, it will be done, but honey-badger don't care, and I'm tired of the whining from SC folks. Just do it.

Amir Taaki wants to bring complete anonymity to Bitcoin. First he has to demonstrate it on other blockchains. The SC developers can demonstrate it on an altcoin and if it works, then Bitcoin can adopt it. If they come up with a two-way peg that works, then the trade-off for whatever benefit the SC offers may be worth some sacrifice, like security or functionality. It's unlikely it can be more secure than Bitcoin AND have other benefits. If they did, then just hard fork Bitcoin.