📅 Original date posted:2017-07-11
📝 Original message:On Jul 11, 2017 09:18, "Chris Stewart via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Concept ACK.
If drivechains are successful they should be viewed as the way we scale
I strongly disagree with that statement.
Drivechains, and several earlier sidechains ideas, are not a scalability
improvement, but merely enabling users to opt-in for another security model.
While obviously any future with wider adoption will need different
technologies that have different trade-offs, and anyone is free to choose
their security model, I don't think this particular one is interesting. In
terms of validation cost to auditors, it is as bad as just a capacity
increase on chain, while simultaneously adding the extra risk of miners
being able to vote to steal your money.
Cheers,
--
Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170711/6c7b8145/attachment.html>;
Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tj…jtl6r
2023-06-07 18:04:12
in reply to nevent1q…88me
Author Public Key
npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rPublished at
2023-06-07 18:04:12Event JSON
{
"id": "66a6aa6f921a0d105609aa842b674ba0a2b913f6d151bd099dee41f2abbfe063",
"pubkey": "5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6",
"created_at": 1686161052,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0dbbb3b4fffe9287047e58a8fa04c4b6c95589f2269ea5553f7cb2691feb3b03",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"51678d36b8c3ac924fe2801451e88a541539ef4cb76d76c8fc0e6cc864f4f7bb",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"ee0fa66772f633411e4432e251cfb15b1c0fe8cd8befd8b0d86eb302402a8b4a"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-07-11\n📝 Original message:On Jul 11, 2017 09:18, \"Chris Stewart via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\nConcept ACK.\n\nIf drivechains are successful they should be viewed as the way we scale\n\n\nI strongly disagree with that statement.\n\nDrivechains, and several earlier sidechains ideas, are not a scalability\nimprovement, but merely enabling users to opt-in for another security model.\n\nWhile obviously any future with wider adoption will need different\ntechnologies that have different trade-offs, and anyone is free to choose\ntheir security model, I don't think this particular one is interesting. In\nterms of validation cost to auditors, it is as bad as just a capacity\nincrease on chain, while simultaneously adding the extra risk of miners\nbeing able to vote to steal your money.\n\nCheers,\n\n-- \nPieter\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170711/6c7b8145/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "ef9925b344cbcf2bceb740adc142d2582a871b93b51a696098f52c2cabe4af81319822f078bd1fe610406fdf836712a8db8c6d75dfa1a2fc9b66e3fe6e4f5072"
}