10 sats \ 2 replies \ @lightcoin_ 10 Aug 2023 \ parent \ on: Are Drivechains the new Ordinals? bitcoin
I think the strongest argument against activating BIP-300 is the argument that making any change to bitcoin (consensus or otherwise) risks breaking something, and consensus bugs in particular are hard to fix without another consensus change (potentially even a hard fork). But this is why we review and test things, and BIP-300 has had an active testnet for a while and running smoothly, and I imagine any PR against Bitcoin Core would get lots of review and testing as well prior to activation. I am cautious of changes to the bitcoin codebase and consensus in particular, but not so much that I oppose all changes.
There have been other widely supported changes to Bitcoin that have been implemented, so surely this can't be the strongest argument or the best steel man of those who oppose it?
How does testnet reveal potential issues related to the economics and game theory of the change?
reply
There have been other widely supported changes to Bitcoin that have been implemented, so surely this can't be the strongest argument or the best steel man of those who oppose it?
I think it is. If you can think of a stronger argument I'd like to hear it.
How does testnet reveal potential issues related to the economics and game theory of the change?
afaict BIP-300 does not affect bitcoin economics or game theory for any bitcoin users who aren't using a hashrate escrow, so to everyone who doesn't plan to use a hashrate escrow, the most important consideration is whether or not the implementation is technically sound.
reply