whenever we get proposals to "fix Bitcoin" as we are currently getting with SC's, it's often helpful to step back to before the proposal to help reassess where we actually. below is a talk by Daniel Krawiscz, whose views very much correspond to mine. listen carefully and realize everything is just fine and there is nothing to panic about by making rash changes to the protocol. other points that struck me in this talk are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKRH_zxpdjM1. OT appears to be a better federated system in that it doesn't require another currency and doesn't require an spvp change to the protocol which would "siphon off" BTC value from its blockchain.
That's your usual federated server model right there. A "better" one? Conventional federated sidechains do not require another currency or spvp change to the protocol.
I'm not sure what your point is
2. he, and Balaji Srinivasan here,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOubCHLXT6A, both advocate "exiting the system" principles if you are dissatisfied with your current existing fiat system. exiting the current system implies that there is another new and secure system to which you can flee which will protect you. since this is high risk, this system would have to be a
Self Contained Financial System that is secure, reliable, and firewalled off from outside intervention. ideally, it would be a public good, not subject to improprieties or vested interests that might be motivated to "profit" off said system. this system, as it currently and already stands, is Bitcoin. its transactional units are inextricably linked to its blockchain for maximum impenetrable security.
Sidechains are within Bitcoin's "self contained financial system".
3. i think the reason you're hearing such common calls for the "blockchain" as distinct and removed from its "currency unit" is b/c the outside public intuitively realizes that if left as is, Bitcoin fundamentally disrupts the current fiat system. they can conceptually "understand" a blockchain as new "tech" while rejecting the currency unit. it also allows them to continue to "resist" buying a seat at the table by using cold hard cash or trading something of great value for BTC. if you can subvert the system by changing the rules, ie the protocol, to break the inextricable link, then you can "attract" value out of the Bitcoin system and convert or transform that value into all manner of inflationary, speculative assets. this is what the spvp or 2wp does. we don't want that.
You don't need sidechains to do so. Value in Bitcoin can be attracted to all kind of inflationary schemes as is.
i view the spvp as a breach in that system, like a leaky valve or offramp thru which real value can be siphoned off and transformed into all manner of speculative assets. this is a problem. guys like brg444 have already shown their cards that Bitcoin "is broken" and if you just insert this "funnel" or 2wp (spvp) into the walls of what now is an impenetrable system, it will make it "better". i think this is fundamentally wrong and is a major flaw in the Blockstream WP. the mere insertion of this funnel will break Bitcoin's Sound Money principles as it allows an offramp into all manner of insecure, alternative ledger systems (fake blockchains). if we can know ahead of time that it "might" be a problem, why insert it? it's not enough to say, "let's just let them put it in and see what happens". if they're wrong, and i am right, it will destroy the system as it erodes confidence that we indeed have a secure firewalled off Bitcoin not subject to for-profit opportunities and structural weakness.
You still don't get it.... SPVP does NOT introduce the off ramp. SPVP is a proof verification mechanism. Federated model sidechains can be created without SPVP and act as the SAME "leaky valve of offramp thru which real value can be siphoned off". So consider that your "problem" exists already.
The OT client for grandma offered what a 500btc bounty or something crazy? But noone ever did it and I don't think those bounty awarders are still around to offer that kinda money for the nice client... otherwise I'd prob take a stab at it.
