The best argument to be made to bitcoiners who oppose #Bip300 is that if #drivechain were to be implemented, it would move all future experimentations on those as opposed to the base layer hence guaranteeing the integrity of the base layer for eternity. To the contrary to what some believe, drivechains would secure the integrity of #Bitcoin for the future.

On whether or not regulators would be against or in favor of #Bip300, I think the strongest case to be made is that they would certainly be against it. Think about it. Bip300 could enable a #drivechain that allows bitcoiners to anonymize their #BTC through a trustless setup. Regulators hate #privacy #crypto like #XMR but maybe they can live with it and afford to force exchanges delisting because the #Monero brand isn’t as strong as the #Bitcoin brand but imagine combining strong privacy with the reach of the Bitcoin brand. It would seem like a regulatory nightmare. Regulators definitely don’t want a private Bitcoin to see the light of the day and for this single reason they would oppose Bip300 not support it.

More than 2/3 of the #relay I was connected to yesterday are down after replying to the thread below. Is this mere coincidence? How is it possible that I can’t connect to all these relays all the sudden? #Nostr #asknostr #ccp #censorship View quoted note →

It seems in the miners’ interests to overwhelmingly support #Bip300 as the activity on #drivechain will generate additional revenue for them. However, could we see a scenario where a substantial share of the hashpower would not support Bip 300? This scenario may play out if some large mining farms are institutionally owned. I think governments wouldn’t want to see drivechain on the #Bitcoin network because those could confer more #privacy to #BTC holders. Hence, those government-control farms may attempt to fork the network to push away the threat that drivechains represent while « stealing » the Bitcoin brand. It’s not difficult to imagine which side #BlackRock would support…

#Censorship reaches an entire new level…

Reclaim The Net: Free Speech, Privacy, Digital Rights

Internet Backbone Provider Hurricane Electric Censoring Kiwi Farms Sets a Dangerous Precedent

Join Reclaim The Net.

The case I could see for authorities and #chainanalysis surveillance companies to want to block #BIP300: 1) #Drivechain could enable stronger #privacy for #Bitcoin. #BTC holders could anonymized their coins BTC -> private drivechain -> BTC without relying on a third-party. 2) Drivechains could enable a cash-like token with fast confirmation times that could better compete against fiat. #Blockchain #Crypto

The arguments I can see against #BIP300 so far: 1) #Drivechain will strongly be associated with the #Bitcoin brand. Something bad happening in a drivechain (hack, scam) would reflect poorly on the #BTC brand. 2) Drivechains could siphon liquidity from the base layer. A drivechain’s token may attract more liquidity than BTC. 3) Drivechains could introduce regulatory risks. If a drivechain isn’t decentralized or is deemed non-compliant, it could help authorities to make the case for regulating Bitcoin. 4) Drivechains haven’t been properly reviewed and tested yet. There is no rush to deploy them. #Blockchain #Crypto

To those opposed to #Bip300, what do you fear to lose if #drivechain were to be implemented on #Bitcoin? Drivechains are optional. If you don’t use them, what could you lose or risk to lose? #BTC

The #TravelRule is being implemented on UK #crypto exchanges. It forces exchanges users to provide the identity for inbound and outbound crypto transfers. Soon, on-ramp and off-ramp crypto to #fiat will be 100% #KYC. Implications will be that your non-KYC #Bitcoin may be deanonymized by the receiver if the receiving address is linked to an exchange. #BTC #Privacy #Monero #XMR

Forbes

UK Crypto Firms Will Now Be Forced To Seize Some Inbound Payments

Brits who receive money via crypto exchanges may now have their funds seized if they can’t provide evidence about the sender’s identity and the...

It takes some time to get value out of #nostr because most known accounts from other social platforms aren’t active on Nostr. But once you’ve built a solid list of new #plebs to follow, you realize that social media doesn’t have to be a waste of time. The quality of content here is so much higher.

If someone is dishonestly debating you, show them where their argument is positioned on the Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement. #tip #tipstr

#Jitsi now requires users to authenticate via Google, Facebook or GitHub… They should at least enable authentication via the #Gitcoin passport to better preserve users’ #privacy. #FOSS

Jitsi

Authentication on meet.jit.si - Jitsi

What’s going on? Starting on August 24th, we will no longer support the anonymous creation of rooms on meet.jit.si, and will require the use of a...

#Twitter #X makes it clear in their Terms of Service that they can terminate any account for opaque reasons such as « Commercial Inviability ».

Reclaim The Net: Free Speech, Privacy, Digital Rights

New X Terms of Service Include Old Twitter Powers To Ban Users For "Commercial Inviability"

Join Reclaim The Net.

On top of this, their privacy policy had been updated to allow the collection of #biometric data or employment history.

Reclaim The Net: Free Speech, Privacy, Digital Rights

X's New Privacy Policy Makes References To Biometric Data Collection

Join Reclaim The Net.

Those who thought that #Musk was going to fix Twitter have been fooled. Only #Nostr fixes this.

After watching this interview, my understanding of how #drivechain work is still incomplete but here are a few concerns I have: 1) Miners would gain the ability to censor transactions by blocking the peg-out with only 25% of the votes. I could see a scenario where large pools (above 25%) would be mandated by a government to censor transactions that don’t comply with #KYC (or other blacklist). Hence, people could not withdraw their fund from a sidechain when trying to send to a non-KYCed #Bitcoin address. 2) Sidechains could cannibalise #BTC security by fragmenting hashpower between the main chain and the sidechains. Are these concerns legit or FUD? An argument that Paul used many times to alleviate these concerns is that if you don’t use drivechains, you’re not impacted but I disagree with this statement. Any issues with fund being stuck on sidechains will undermine the Bitcoin brand. Most folks are not going to understand the nuances and it could result in the public perception that Bitcoin is not safe and secure. I’m not opposed to Bitcoin evolving but I’d rather like to see proposals related to on-chain scaling for Bitcoin to be more usable as a medium of exchange. If there is a risk to undermine the brand or security of Bitcoin, I’d prefer for the #crypto experimentations to take place on alternative #blockchain rather than on Bitcoin. View quoted note →

The #drivechain #BIP300 debate is reminiscent of the 2017 block size increase debate. Although both sides have technical arguments to support their position at its core, the disagreement boils down to whether #Bitcoin should be kept as it or be upgraded. It’s all about Bitcoin politics: Bitcoin conservatism Vs Bitcoin progressivism. Bitcoin conservatism will never die unless the conservatives lose the Bitcoin brand or the progressists succeed in building a Bitcoin fork that will surpass #BTC adoption.