Quote from: brg444 on August 24, 2015, 12:43:02 AM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on August 24, 2015, 12:36:23 AM

Quote

My original Bitcoin is essentially held in escrow

Thought as much. You are handing over your bitcoin to a 3rd party, and you rely on trust to get it back, like any escrow service.

And dont give me "enforced with software" because it will be enforced by whoever has the majority in a 2-of-3 multisig.

Quote from: brg444 on August 24, 2015, 12:35:09 AM

Read my post above. Then read the sidechains white paper. Then come back here when you actually understand how this stuff works

Miss me with your "arguments to ignorance" until then.

A what now?

Quote from: Argument_from _ignorance

The assumption of a conclusion or fact based primarily on lack of evidence to the contrary. Usually best described by, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

You said it behaves like escrow.

And what I said was, it is placing it into a 3rd party that you need to trust. There is no lack of evidence on this, surely?

Quote from: Escrow

place in custody or trust of 3rd party until a specified condition has been fulfilled.

What this is doing is changing Satoshis view of bit coin from a "peer-to-peer payment network" to something different. Its so fundamental to what bitcoin is, I frankly dont understand why we are even arguing about it. First line of the white paper makes it pretty clear:

Quote from: Satoshi

A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution

Note the use of the word "Purely". Also note that he also foresaw the possibility of 3rd parties getting involved, and expressly mentioned their exclusion in the opening gambit.

But if you still aren't convinced, try reading a bit further into his white paper. Like to the next line

Quote from: Satoshi

Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending

So, where is your argument to ignorance? The only ignorance I see is your own refusal to accept that side chains introduce 'trusted' 3rd parties into what was conceived to be a trust-less peer to peer network.