We asked Saifedean to describe Drivechains to a Winemaker.
DID NON DISAPPOINT🤣
Login to reply
Replies (31)
🤣
Are you & Saifedean planning a sequel to Let’s Go To Prison? 
Haha! There is always a market for something!
I’m definitely for ossification at this point. As more morons join the space the noise drowns out the signal a bit.
The early days were ideology and engineering driven. Concerned that bad incentives will sneak it and corrupt something in the base code.
drivechains are a shitcoin
Ouch! I think StratumV2 to decentralize mining first, then it might be worth revisiting.
🤣🤣
The real fun is that drivechains dont actually scale Bitcoin, and worse, add more wasted tx while adding miner risk
Damn. That's probably as good a description as any.
Legend
Iconic 😆
Hahahaha. Slayer.
There is no way to scale bitcoin without trade offs. The only way to get the maximal security and sovereignty of L1 bitcoin is to pay the full market rate for onchain fees. Most people will deal with a derivative of bitcoin in higher layers. And that’s OK. It will still be much better than the current monetary system.
Almost spilled my coffee.
🤣
I kinda understand the point of drivechains, but I also don't think it's the best way forward rn. The scalability gain may not be worth the centralization risk for thebusers, but in some specific case, in a culture where piss drinking is the norm, it might make sense.
I wouldn't understand though.
Prompt engineering Saifedean
This is outstanding. :)
Great!😂 finally I'm gettin there
But shoot; gotta change my banner now 💟
That's pretty witty!
🤣 How does he not have his own wikipedia page?
I don't think saifedean's opinion on drivechains is anymore useful than any pleb out there, he's an economist - not a technologist.
With that being said, it's pretty funny 🤣
Who's written the best piece on miner risk?
Nic Carter.
Seriously. Before he went full retard I think.
He’s written some brilliant stuff on mining.
Saif is a master at pointing out grifters and con artists. Basededean Ammous
Are you pro drivechains?
I mean what’s your view on them ?
It seems to me that the only point we should be focusing on is miner incentives, not what drivechains can or can't do.
I believe we need to maintain intellectually thorough discourse on how people feel mining incentives will play out.
Hopefully this is executed with long format writings, making points that are backed up by substance.
What we have now is tribalism on a topic that needs coherence, regardless of the outcome.
Miner incentives are necessary, but at what cost?
I mean you’re willing to bring in trade offs (shitcoinery) on L1 to justify miner incentive. Even if there is no shitcoinery, the risk of introducing a bug/complications or an attack vector to the main chain is huge.
Drivechainers claim that miner incentives on L1 wouldn't change, just increase profits.
From my understanding their claim sits on the idea that any sidechain created still uses bitcoins, and the only way to get bitcoins is by using the mainchain.
Also, I'm not sure about everyone up in arms about "shitcoinery on btc" as new tokens aren't necessarily created - rather just trustless pegging in Btc & then peg out just like LN.
Introducing a bug on the mainchain is what everyone is always worried about, as am I, but if we look at previous code changes,
Taproot,
Segwit,
There have been no critical bugs, & these upgrades were highly necessary imho.
The dude wants to bring ALL the altcoins to btc 😬 
Pretty sure he means any features of a desired chain can be had with a side chain, but BTC is the common denominator, no special token.
So if there's demand people will peg in BTC, vs generating fake demand with a fake token.
Totally get that he wants features like zcash, zkproofs and mimble wimble
But from what I heard the drivechains can introduce oracle issues to L1 (don’t shoot the messenger)
iconic
View quoted note →