If users can opt-in to another security model, why can't they opt-in to another scaling model? The mainchain (Bitcoin) does not have to adopt any of the changes made to a sidechain such as larger blocks for example.

On Jul 11, 2017 09:18, "Chris Stewart via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@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

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev