Published on: 2017-09-26T01:15:09+00:00
In a discussion about sidechains, a user named Patrick proposes the idea of a non-official sidechain that would distribute rewards and allow users to share their burden. However, another user named ZmnSCPxj points out that most sidechain proposals use merge mining for security similar to the main chain. ZmnSCPxj suggests "blind" merge mining or publishing entire sidechain block headers on the main chain to achieve this. He also recommends calling this system "sharding" instead of "sidechain" as sharding requires protection against double-spending. After being enlightened about lightning network, pruning, and sharding, Patrick withdraws his proposal realizing that these technologies accomplish what he had set out to do.ZmnSCPxj discusses the security issues of non-official chains and explains why merge mining is commonly used in sidechain proposals. He suggests using the term "sharding" for future systems that include part of the reward for parity between all chains. He acknowledges that sharding a distributed ledger while ensuring correct operation is difficult and provides a link to an article by Peter Todd on why scaling Bitcoin with sharding is hard. ZmnSCPxj advises that building a sidechain capable of sharding would be a good course of action once an acceptable sidechain-enabling proposal is agreed upon by the majority of Bitcoin Core developers.The context also mentions the lack of security in non-official chains due to a lack of miners and users' reluctance to use them. However, they are considered useful for developing and testing concepts. The possibility of building an external proof-of-concept sidechain of side chains to achieve official reward splitting chains with equal security is discussed. Elements and Drivechains are mentioned as possible solutions, but no further information is provided.Patrick Sharp proposes a Bitcoin side chain implementation that would be officially supported and built by official bitcoin software. The chains would have an identifier in the block header, and each address would be assigned to a chain via (address) mod (number of chains). Transaction fees would be split between chains if an address sends to another chain. The chains would come into being through a fork or split, and every 2016 blocks, if some percentage of blocks on any chain are larger than a specified amount, all chains would increment their power value and fork on their block. However, it is noted that sidechains were originally designed to add and prototype new features to Bitcoin, not to increase the effective block size. For scaling, the Lightning Network is considered a superior solution as it keeps most transactions off-chain.Overall, the conversation revolves around the proposal of a non-official sidechain, the security issues of non-official chains, the use of merge mining in sidechain proposals, the concept of sharding, and the scaling solutions such as the Lightning Network.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T21:55:13.404920+00:00