1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
|
Return-Path: <earonesty@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1223C000E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Sep 2021 20:20:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9D634017B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Sep 2021 20:20:36 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001,
SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=q32-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 HriIEWC4UMIE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Sep 2021 20:20:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com (mail-pf1-x436.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::436])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CCB640156
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 2 Sep 2021 20:20:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id 2so2547571pfo.8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 02 Sep 2021 13:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=q32-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=FG5s5JppIlumTxJkDuT9PQlL6NGj2pQJo5pml4Cb2+g=;
b=tc+FQoFhg8S2TupSaLrV0nprCZ4Txyvj3og7M8b1F9tIJBcVrepp85x9QWMh3YXPtA
8r4hnIwUvIG+McVhZ1FYfRfkTGuCmNYxae4hELkGxQlbSILC75J/Oxsw2Ek43gqSKl9a
erYWF5Br8ZhM8HXVKAdgi6l1DukEeO1uykUKwu9RkIuG4xRrcj4apBNl/b/gOHEZ4S/1
CK0VN2Zr44XxtCE57Q34eM4wHKkpdi3uCI70ZThiORhOkmoLgVX2jInrSsqZmkR3T+lE
1pmaJ3jDkRsAQoNsNPrIpjHuYq8h9cejTl0UYFxm93DgaqELuL/eO65bSdjrFfJHJvYU
fy1Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=FG5s5JppIlumTxJkDuT9PQlL6NGj2pQJo5pml4Cb2+g=;
b=qyRDacmauUr74tmeVj7qFgDAj711uX9u8+4NU3Hsgb7s/UxGWvcG+98inJGdOyHXj1
VXyJCv9xqo3xDMk/p7zATGYOPzbZHGPjnlR4j0D/13KjfIw3BmA7VehUt4QCPvGWpOCS
EPRnyfrQVtArDhB1cAtNS0Y04SnbCm+ALOMPqLUzNaxaCBZDXgkDQj9gXSSgJfo3Xs8o
CY35QOJqK3llg1B12jTDf9OHqBMJlbeMajYbGgnfNssVFOswgCMxeTWgSuOAtWqLFd8S
/+q5KKvlLcrLkSw6l3buEJz8FyD2AUK8/NPwjeRYUelKwOrfl8JKKI7uqgkql/URDlaV
IY7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Ird5d236zyrWBaZuwVC5hYlRUKjqrDWJMG+Rdenfl3TOxFf1f
9pKjv1qEKbBPxva+gZb2bqpDpVOGdGV6jLuKtYnWOVQSRgYL
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyrAWaDz/TavilPG5IYnwXZJfX+6tjGjyXsp2qSqJvRrk8S6Yw0tfrnpxzi3X5eGSn36mGmyBWRLgAADv0nP1g=
X-Received: by 2002:a62:28c:0:b0:405:397f:5c9e with SMTP id
134-20020a62028c000000b00405397f5c9emr135283pfc.74.1630614034304; Thu, 02 Sep
2021 13:20:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <MibU_fn--3-2@tutanota.de>
In-Reply-To: <MibU_fn--3-2@tutanota.de>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 16:20:21 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJowKgLX=9FVAWsSBdxwzopR=+81mVjZH0o1=MHJd7ebvrXsbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 22:12:24 +0000
Subject: Re: [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 <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 20:20:36 -0000
drivechain is a cool proposal. i don't think there's a ton of
obvious risk to the network itself (not slow, not too much work for
nodes, etc), but it seems to encourage "bad behavior", not sure the
incentives line up to prevent thefts, and not sure that won't turn
around and bite bitcoin's main chain.
of course stacks can do this even without drivechain, so not sure what
we're hiding from there
if you're talking about extensions there's lightning-compatible
mimblewimble, which is probably more important, since it gets bitcoin
to global-scale payments, while improving fungibility, and probably
can't be implemented safely via drivechain
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 2:24 PM Prayank via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> printf("Hello, World!");
>
> What are your thoughts on Drivechain and associated BIPs?
>
> This article compares Liquid and Lightning: https://blog.liquid.net/six-d=
ifferences-between-liquid-and-lightning/. Two things from it that I am inte=
rested 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: https://medium.com=
/iovlabs-innovation-stories/similarities-and-differences-between-rsk-and-et=
hereum-e480655eff37
>
> Paul Sztorc had mentioned few things about fees in this video: https://yo=
utu.be/oga8Pwbq9M0?t=3D481 I am interested to know same for LN, Liquid and =
Rootstock as well so asked a question on Bitcoin Stackexchange today: https=
://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/109466/bitcoin-transactions-associat=
ed-with-layer-2-projects
>
> Two critiques are mentioned here: https://www.drivechain.info/peer-review=
/peer-review-new/ with lot of names. I don't agree with everything mentione=
d on project website although any comments on technical things that can hel=
p 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 inte=
resting threads but Its mostly used for followers, likes, retweets etc. and=
people can write anything for it.
> 2.Avoid misinformation, controversies etc.
>
> My personal opinion:
>
> We should encourage sidechain projects. I don't know much about Drivechai=
n to form a strong opinion but concept looks good which can help in making =
better sidechains.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------------------------------------------
>
>
> The website used in the slides of above YouTube video is misleading for f=
ew reasons:
>
> 1.Blocks mined everyday (in MB) for Bitcoin is ~150 MB. It is ~600 MB for=
Ethereum. Block limits for Bitcoin is ~4 MB per 10 minutes and ~500 MB for=
Ethereum. If full nodes will be run by few organizations on AWS we can bas=
ically do everything on chain. However the main goal isn't too make money a=
nd create an illusion to do something innovative, primary goal was/is decen=
tralized network that allows settlement of payments.
>
> 2.Bitcoin uses UTXO model while Ethereum uses Account model. Basic differ=
ence in transactions for two is explained in an article https://coinmetrics=
.io/on-data-and-certainty/. Irony is the website in the slides for screensh=
ot is using Coinmetrics API and this misleading website is even shared by C=
oinmetrics team on Twitter. So in some cases you are doing more transaction=
s, paying more fees for work which could have been done with less. Ineffici=
ency.
>
> 3.Failed transactions paying fees on Ethereum everyday, no such transacti=
ons on Bitcoin.
>
> 4.Other improvements that affect fees: Segwit, Layer 2, Batching, UTXO co=
nsolidation, Fee estimation, Coin selection, Exchanges, Wallets etc.
>
>
> --
> Prayank
>
> A3B1 E430 2298 178F
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
