they dont strengthen bitcoin. they lock bitcoin and get users to use other networks of coins that are not bitcoin.
EG
LN payments are not bitcoin payments. you can easily spot this because LN uses tokens of 12 decimals not 8
LN and side chains are services. not sole route future solutions.
bitcoin needs to continue to innovate on network. not promote other networks
remember rule 1
if you dont hold sole control of a bitcoin private key. you dont own your bitcoin
remember rule 2
if its not confirmed on the bitcoin blockchain. its not a bitcoin transaction.
(i can make 20billion transactions that have balance. but until confirmed.. it aint bitcoin im holding)
rootstock, bakkt and LN are not bitcoin. they are just tagging the logo and brand to their network fr fame and investment. but ultimately they also accept/will accept other coins without only being a feature for only bitcoin. nor would they break if not bitcoin exclusive.
Thanks for your clarification. The concept of sidechains seemed a little confusing to me, but now I understand how they work. While they're not within the Bitcoin network, they could be as secure as the main chain if I'm correct. This means that there could exist altcoins that would rely on Bitcoin's blockchain for greater security.
Speaking of RootStock, if it becomes highly successful, then it could easily rival Ethereum. Smart contract capabilities on Bitcoin would allow dApps to gain the security of the Bitcoin blockchain which is quite revolutionary, IMO.
when you're using sidechain tokens, you're definitely not using bitcoins. since they aren't secured by the mining consensus, they should be considered much less secure and valued accordingly. there's also nothing that says 1 sidechain token = 1 bitcoin. they can have different supplies.
i prefer to see sidechains more like the altcoins of today + interoperability with bitcoin. there might be a shift in value towards altcoins that can work as bitcoin sidechains, but there will always be market interest in altcoins generally. this is because most altcoin features will never be added to the bitcoin consensus---as you point out, it will happen on sidechains.
Probably. Both sidechains and altcoins could exist for a long time, if there's enough interest from people into using it within the mainstream world. The way I see it, is that sidechains would have a greater advantage than altcoins in terms of security and reliability. There have been many altcoins with small networks that have been easily attacked. While many are quite revolutionary with their unique features and technology, they're not as secure and reliable as the Bitcoin blockchain. That's why I believe that sidechains could become a big hit, even if they're not able to replace altcoins in the future.
However, things that cannot be achieved on a sidechain, can be done in altcoins, so it's good to have competition in the market to allow people to choose from a variety of cryptocurrencies for their own specific needs.
Yes. While most altcoins are worthless, there are a select few which are unique within the blockchain industry. I don't think that all the features available in altcoins would be implemented into sidechains, except for the most important ones such as smart contracts, and privacy. As such, altcoins might continue to exist as they would provide something unique to people in the mainstream world. Some have their unique mining algorithms, while others have different approaches when it comes to privacy and security.
Therefore, it'll be interesting to watch how both of said concepts (sidechains and altcoins) would behave within a few years from now. I'm sure that they'll mature until they become a rock-solid ecosystem for the benefit of everyone around the world.