Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: Drivechain critiques by gmaxwell revisited, maybe you changed your mind?
by
NotATether
on 14/12/2023, 07:03:46 UTC
I want BIP300. If Bitcoin is going to destroy the banks and become the world’s money, it must have the properties of cash. Fast, cheap, and private. I don’t care what BlackRock or Michael Saylor wants.

Lightning is broken, and never had what it takes to scale Bitcoin anyway. There’s no reason to be concerned about "shitcoins on Bitcoin" because we already have monkee jpegs on L1. If anything in the future could possibly be worse, then we should already have the ability to throw it on a sidechain.

Miners don’t even need to run a sidechain node. Even if they did, it wouldn’t matter. Nobody has to keep an entire history of the L2 blockchain. Every peg-out is like a new genesis block, because L1 has confirmed that everything is valid to that point.

All valid points.

Although it has come to the point where most changes nowadays can only be done through Core, which itself has a narrow development team.

It should be possible to implement a drivechain without necessitating a protocol change or soft fork. Actually I just did a google search and have seen that its already possible. The only thing that needs to be done is skip verification of transactions inside merged-mined blocks.