like i said above, user anonymity should be a widely sought after feature. and your security argument is a logical fallacy in that it is perfectly reasonable to expect that faster tx times will be achieved in the future that doesn't effect network security, point being SC's coupled with that innovation will obsolete Bitcoin
If it is so then it will be implemented in the mainchain
why? you already said consensus is impossible. what migration % of BTC to scBTC will force the implementation? give me a %. and at what % would it be too late?
Quote
you should. but how inconvenient, insecure, along with identity compromise from having to move all your BTC to a SC every few years.
As inconvenient, insecure as it was to move your fiat to BTC.
way more difficult. with fiat at least one has some guarantee and recourse. digging out cold storage wallets to transfer to the SC is inconvenient, risky, and identity revealing. how many times do i have to say this before it registers with you?
Quote
Every few years? the scenario I'm proposing would need to be, in my mind, a paradigm shift of the order of fiat money/Bitcoin. I wouldn't bet on such innovation pace because as I have said previously, Bitcoin is close to as good as it gets as is.
sigh. then why go thru all the risk and trouble if SC's aren't going to significantly push Bitcoin forward?
Quote
if a SC employs sidecoins/altcoins, the risk for Bitcoin is even greater than that of a simple SC alone just paying fees. miners who defect would now be getting paid not only tx fees but also block rewards on a SC that everybody has migrated to b/c of the innovation.
That's not what I'm saying. My point is the sidecoin scenario is no different than any altcoin ie. the sidechains does not enable them in any significant way.
it's totally different b/c the MM helps bootstrap any SC, with or w/o altcoin.