"When reading a draft of this post, my wife got kind of depressed right around here. Her macabre question, basically, is: “if everyone just winds up interacting with sidechains, and not Real Bitcoin, hasn’t the whole thing failed? At every point you’re dealing with some token that isn’t really bitcoin."
Continuing the thread of discussions in a series of articles on sidechains and trying to frame our thinking for a Bitcoin future where billions can take advantage of its sovereignty, inflation resistance, and security, we dive into James O'Beirne's follow up to Anthony town's article in read 757. If we are all stuck in sidechains and semi-custodial systems, then did we actually fix anything, or was the whole idea a failure from the start?
Check out the original article at : Thoughts on scaling and consensus changes (2023) - Protocol Design - Delving Bitcoin
If you missed the previous episode, it lays important context for today's read: Read 757
Don't forget to check out our amazing sponsors!
-------------------------
"The chief evil is unlimited government…nobody is qualified to wield unlimited power.” — F.A. Hayek
--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/bitcoinaudible/message
What if the real issue is actually much deeper than how to deal with spam? Everyone is arguing about mempool settings, who gets to...
"Our existing financial system is a mirage of wealth and liquidity, sustained by an ever-expanding money supply. Bitcoin emerges as the ultimate shield against...
"Decentralization has [...] been a vessel for achieving a concession from a centralized body it is protesting. Every decentralization play has followed a simple...