Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA922C000E for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9900A4012A for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:11:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tutanota.de Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B1CgSsA5ZMMh for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:11:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from w1.tutanota.de (w1.tutanota.de [81.3.6.162]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BD6C40019 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:11:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from w3.tutanota.de (unknown [192.168.1.164]) by w1.tutanota.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AD4EFA0AFA for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:11:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1630602682; s=s1; d=tutanota.de; h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Content-Description:Content-ID:Content-Type:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:Date:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Sender; bh=55XwAPJFsnWn/TM0g7Ikq4lqNZyq70T16bo1YeQKXoU=; b=Se/U42w0t248MIWpqf0qQuccm3GvoS+AE5UWzVyET53Jd49a6TmLEGNmK2jLngqX OFwMKl8vxCIkFOJktfRzeVX6PiL2FGsSi3gkAhJgOO4Ohj1FiOP8yt5JhJF0ywD5Bf8 n1aUo2zdZujKlnxcJsCg4YyIhUEZW5C4JVs6R2HAhiElc6HckbhLnNLsZZAJvGw7GUn jzouEJyjGpi6ebAvBi40iUIOByN5D7r2V5rBGgVc673SQAsWyI2OBGyCgH9Hzf9DHxx dB/HKa8igKUDlqxSYT4cjA7qQbCGVqpr4FYIDDn9eKrhsfI1ZrcyM2RClR05EHQmL0n hMotY2tb6g== Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 19:11:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Prayank To: Bitcoin Dev Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_32620_2037880191.1630602682622" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 18:24:31 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Drivechain: BIP 300 and 301 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 17:11:26 -0000 ------=_Part_32620_2037880191.1630602682622 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable printf("Hello, World!"); What are your thoughts on Drivechain and associated BIPs? This article compares Liquid and Lightning:=C2=A0https://blog.liquid.net/si= x-differences-between-liquid-and-lightning/. Two things from it that I am i= nterested in while evaluating Drivechain: 1.Trust model 2.On-Ramps and Off-Ramps Other things: 1.Security of Bitcoin (Layer 1) 2.Bitcoin transactions and fees expected on layer 1 because of Drivechain Similarities and Differences between RSK and Ethereum:=C2=A0https://medium.= com/iovlabs-innovation-stories/similarities-and-differences-between-rsk-and= -ethereum-e480655eff37 Paul Sztorc had mentioned few things about fees in this video:=C2=A0https:/= /youtu.be/oga8Pwbq9M0?t=3D481=C2=A0I am interested to know same for LN, Liq= uid and Rootstock as well so asked a question on Bitcoin Stackexchange toda= y:=C2=A0https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/109466/bitcoin-transact= ions-associated-with-layer-2-projects Two critiques are mentioned here:=C2=A0https://www.drivechain.info/peer-rev= iew/peer-review-new/=C2=A0with lot of names. I don't agree with everything = mentioned on project website although any comments on technical things that= can help Bitcoin and Bitcoin projects will be great. Why discuss here and not on Twitter? 1.Twitter is not the best place for such discussions. There are some intere= sting threads but Its mostly used for followers, likes, retweets etc. and p= eople can write anything for it. 2.Avoid misinformation, controversies etc.=C2=A0 My personal opinion: We should encourage sidechain projects. I don't know much about Drivechain = to form a strong opinion but concept looks good which can help in making be= tter sidechains. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------------------------------------- The website used in the slides of above YouTube video is misleading for few= reasons: 1.Blocks mined everyday (in MB) for Bitcoin is ~150 MB. It is ~600 MB for E= thereum. Block limits for Bitcoin is ~4 MB per 10 minutes and ~500 MB for E= thereum. If full nodes will be run by few organizations on AWS we can basic= ally do everything on chain. However the main goal isn't too make money and= create an illusion to do something innovative, primary goal was/is decentr= alized network that allows settlement of payments. 2.Bitcoin uses UTXO model while Ethereum uses Account model. Basic differen= ce in transactions for two is explained in an article=C2=A0https://coinmetr= ics.io/on-data-and-certainty/. Irony is the website in the slides for scree= nshot is using Coinmetrics API and this misleading website is even shared b= y Coinmetrics team on Twitter. So in some cases you are doing more transact= ions, paying more fees for work which could have been done with less. Ineff= iciency. 3.Failed transactions paying fees on Ethereum everyday, no such transaction= s on Bitcoin. 4.Other improvements that affect fees: Segwit, Layer 2, Batching, UTXO cons= olidation, Fee estimation, Coin selection, Exchanges, Wallets etc. --=20 Prayank A3B1 E430 2298 178F ------=_Part_32620_2037880191.1630602682622 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
printf("Hello, World!");

What are your thoughts on Drivechain and associated BIPs?

This article compares Liqui= d and Lightning: https://blog.liquid.net/six-differences-between-liqui= d-and-lightning/. Two things from it that I am interested in while evaluati= ng Drivechain:

1.Tru= st model
2.On-Ramps and Off-Ramps

Other things:

1.Security of Bitcoin (Layer 1)
2.Bitcoin transactions and fees expected on layer 1 beca= use of Drivechain

Si= milarities and Differences between RSK and Ethereum: https://medium.co= m/iovlabs-innovation-stories/similarities-and-differences-between-rsk-and-e= thereum-e480655eff37

Paul Sztorc had mentioned few things about fees in this video: https:= //youtu.be/oga8Pwbq9M0?t=3D481 I am interested to know same for LN, Li= quid and Rootstock as well so asked a question on Bitcoin Stackexchange tod= ay: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/109466/bitcoin-transac= tions-associated-with-layer-2-projects

Two critiques are mentioned here: https://www.drive= chain.info/peer-review/peer-review-new/ with lot of names. I don't agr= ee with everything mentioned on project website although any comments on te= chnical things that can help Bitcoin and Bitcoin projects will be great.

Why discuss here and n= ot on Twitter?

1.Twi= tter is not the best place for such discussions. There are some interesting= threads but Its mostly used for followers, likes, retweets etc. and people= can write anything for it.
2.Avoid misinformati= on, controversies etc. 

My personal opinion:

We should encourage sidechain projects. I don't know much about = Drivechain to form a strong opinion but concept looks good which can help i= n making better sidechains.

-----------------------------------------------------------------= -----------------------------------------------------


The website used in the slides of above YouTube video is misleading fo= r few reasons:

1.Blo= cks mined everyday (in MB) for Bitcoin is ~150 MB. It is ~600 MB for Ethere= um. Block limits for Bitcoin is ~4 MB per 10 minutes and ~500 MB for Ethere= um. If full nodes will be run by few organizations on AWS we can basically = do everything on chain. However the main goal isn't too make money and crea= te an illusion to do something innovative, primary goal was/is decentralize= d network that allows settlement of payments.
2.Bitcoin uses UTXO model while Ethereum uses Acc= ount model. Basic difference in transactions for two is explained in an art= icle https://coinmetrics.io/on-data-and-certainty/. Irony is the websi= te in the slides for screenshot is using Coinmetrics API and this misleadin= g website is even shared by Coinmetrics team on Twitter. So in some cases y= ou are doing more transactions, paying more fees for work which could have = been done with less. Inefficiency.

3.Failed transactions paying fees on Ethereum everyday, no s= uch transactions on Bitcoin.

4.Other improvements that affect fees: Segwit, Layer 2, Batching,= UTXO consolidation, Fee estimation, Coin selection, Exchanges, Wallets etc= .


--
Pra= yank

A3B1 E430 2298 178F
------=_Part_32620_2037880191.1630602682622--