Author: ZmnSCPxj 2017-05-23 00:13:55
Published on: 2017-05-23T00:13:55+00:00
The context is a series of questions and comments regarding the proposed use of OP_BRIBE in Drivechain. The author questions whether OP_BRIBE is meant to be softforked or hardforked in, as it cannot be softforked since it is not a softfork-compatible replacement for OP_NOP. They also ask whether Drivechain requires a hardfork, as they understand that a softforked anyone-can-spend transaction is used to implement Drivechain. The author proposes a more secure proposal for sidechain reorgs using SPV proofs, but acknowledges confusion over how Drivechain handles sidechain reorgs while keeping Bitcoin miners blinded. They also question how multiple side block creators on the same sidechain with the possibility of chain splits are handled. The author expresses their understanding that the main issue with miners blindly accepting sidechain commitments is that it violates "Don't trust, verify", rather than allowing data centers to be slightly smaller by not including side:nodes. They also argue that the blinding in merge mining does not seem to be useful without the miner actually seeing the sidechain and suggests that if miners upgrade to side:fullnode, there would be no point in blinding. Finally, they question whether the datacenter point is simply that the proposal suggests reducing the size of the datacenter by removing surge suppressors and UPS's.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T01:01:36.909302+00:00