If I have to be honest I still can't quite grasp cypher arguments, I feel there's
something but at the same time I didn't find his narrative rigorously enough.
It seems more gut feeling rather than rational arguments.
E.g. the link between the ledger and the token that spvp should break if implemented:
If we consider 1:1 time invariant 2wp, for a transitive property I'd say that scBTC is
linked to the ledger in the same way btc is. At the same time I somewhat know that sc has
to be secured by merge mining and here come into play miner incentive you're referring to.
Having said what's your position on bitcoin current issues? Just to name a few:
scalability, tx confermation time, lack of incentive to run a node. Do you think
We can live with them? If not what are the needed solutions and how do you
think to deploy those?
Scalability as in block size limit.
Transaction fees.
The other issues are non issues in relation to the above. (I'd feel progress is happening if we just altered 2 lines of code over the next 3 years while we debated the issue)
http://www.freebanking.org/2014/11/18/bitcoin-will-bite-the-dust/ read this.Where Kevin Dowd's analysis falls short is he doesn't account for the economics in the block halving. The block halving wrestles power away from miners.
I've outlined how miners in cooperation with the proposed change to the protocol can avoid the declining revenue in the halving.
For every cent miners earn mining Bitcoin on a SideChain they insulate themselves from the disruption in the inevitable 50% revenue drop, and for every bit of insulation we move closer to Kevin Dowd's inevitable Bitcoin prediction.