pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @NorthKoreanHostage 18 Jan 2023 \ on: Drivechain (BIP300-301) Bitcoin advanced sidechain discussion bitcoin
I say no to every change. Bitcoin is already perfect. Don't fuck it up.
Many changes have happened in bitcoin's history. Are you suggesting we wind the clock back on bitcoin to before there were any changes? If no changes happened ever then bitcoin would have no block size limit and the bitcoin supply would be like 184.5 billion BTC because the value overflow bug would have never been fixed. Or are you suggesting that bitcoin is perfect now that all of the changes that you find acceptable have happened already but no further changes can happen?
reply
You seem to have confused now with the past. Did you think I said Bitcoin was always perfect? It's perfect (now).
reply
I'm not confused, I asked two questions for clarification. Thanks for clarifying. So before the taproot fork a little over a year ago you'd have said that bitcoin was not perfect then, and just needed that one more change to reach perfection?
reply
Yup.
reply
That's suspiciously convenient and seems rather arbitrary to me, but ok. I think we need one more change: validity rollups. Then I'll be content :) https://lightco.in/2023/01/03/meta-problem/
reply
Rollups don't solve anything.
The Bitcoin blockchain already grows slower than the growth of hard drives.
It is as if the blockchain is relatively shrinking despite it's growth.
Rollups aren't needed at all and trying to add them might break Bitcoin. So that's a big no from me.
reply
Rollups don't solve anything
We'll have to agree to disagree here. I pointed out the most important problem they solve in the blog post I linked above, and have elaborated further on other problems they solve in my report at https://bitcoinrollups.org
trying to add them might break Bitcoin
Taproot/Schnorr could have broken bitcoin. Why didn't you oppose those?
reply