Quote from: NewLiberty on November 06, 2014, 01:51:17 PM

Quote from: Dusty on November 06, 2014, 01:11:49 PM

Quote from: NewLiberty on November 06, 2014, 10:18:31 AM

You should have ended that particular sentence with the first phrase.

I can't understand what you mean.

Your statement:

Quote from: Dusty

Again, I don't know if the 2wp using SPV could work as defined, but if they to, SC would solve all the problems Bitcoin has today and guarantee his success in the way forward.

Side chains per se, do not solve all the problems Bitcoin has today, nor are they a guarantee of anything.
What they are is a mechanism. They may have the potential to solve problems. That will depend entirely on what people do with them. They are another tool in the tool belt. It can be used to build or destroy. The existence of this mechanism does not guarantee the success of Bitcoin. It would be nice if it did, and we could all just sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

Instead there is a new tool, a new mechanism. It may be used by all sorts of people, and groups. This is great, it is the nature of open source collaboration. However we must recognize that only some people may share common goals with you or me, and others may not. And you may not know whether any particular SC creator does or doesn't. There may be wolves in alpaca clothing.

These are the sorts of things that I (and presumably CypherDoc and others) consider with caution. What makes this even more of a concern is when we see these posts that essentially say "there is nothing to worry about", "this fixes everything" or "the details of the cryptography don't matter".
Those sort of statements are either (a) just misunderstood word choices (and something else was meant by the author), or (b) maybe the author is simply misguided or exuberant , or (c) perhaps they may be malicious attempts to misguide others.

If it is (a) it tends to get more clear with some attention. If (b) it is worrisome that there are going to be coming disappointments when the hoped for effects don't materialize, and (c) is just expected and is dealt with in much the same way as (a).

What you wrote here below is sensible. We may disagree on some matters of preference, but I like that you say what side chains "can" do rather than what they "will" do. It is important to understand that they can be used and also can be abused. I think Cypherdoc is understanding the function and capabilities pretty well. I also think his caution is reasonable. Some SC may be great and solve some problems...And I think that there will be some SC that end up costing some people a LOT of their hard earned bitcoin due to fraud, misrepresentation, and blind trust. So when I see folks saying "everything is great, Side Chains are here to save us" type stuff, all the red flags go up.

The problem that me, and seemingly a couple others, have with Cypherdoc's concerns is that most of them boil down to the creation of altcoins, something that sidechains did not introduce and do little to enable. I hope you have come to understand this part because the accusation that you make of SC proponents being "unreasonable" can equally be applied to most, if not all, of the SC opponents in this thread.

You seem to be a reasonable person who has a great ability to distill his ideas in thoughtful and concise manners. Maybe you want to share with us notable weaknesses of the 2wp and what considerable risks you can foresee?