Let’s put it simply,
In the meat world 99% of the population does not understands what the central banker is talking about.
In the crypto world 98% does not know (or do not have the time to research) the protocol.
So in this particular venue, we believe when bytemaster tells us ‘side chains will be/are unsecure’
SO!!!
We do not need forward/backward or sideway compatibility with anyone… OK
So shut up… and listen…
:))))))
As a reminder, the topic of the thread is, "What does Blockchain 2.0 mean for Bitshares X and other Invictus DACs?"
Note this interview with Adam Back and Austin Hill:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvaAiBMdGt8beginning @8:55 or so. Adam B. Levine asks the essential question about security. Austin Hill's response was that the bitcoin protocol itself needed to be changed to secure sidechains inside the bitcoin network. These people are at the professional heart of cryptography. Right now bitcoin is in version 0.9x. These guys have announced plans to work with the core bitcoin developers so that by the time bitcion 2.0 comes out 2 or 3 years from now, sidechains will be fully secured by the hashing power of the network. Part of the narrative is that bitcoin has effectively crowdfunded an ASIC hashing infrastructure currently valued at $250,000,000 and growing.
Look, I am all for dPoS. But to date it's untested. If it works flawlessly, then dpos will go into history and bytemaster will be more celebrated than Satoshi. But if the first missle blows up on the launch pad, I3 would be well-advised to have a thought-through contingency plan.
Re: What does Blockchain 2.0 mean for Bitshares X and other Invictus DACs?