BIP-300 biff Sparks Bitcoin Drivechain Debate

The proposal aims to permit the development of addit­ional block­chains on the Bitcoin network. In August, a core developer rewrote a proposal’s code and then sought BTC codebase inclusion. This action sparked fresh discu­ssions regarding its merits and generated further debate among stakeholders.

A Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) stirs debate among enthusiasts after six years. This proposal suggests incorp­orating “sidec­hains” onto the existing BTC network.

Some warn of increased Bitcoin scams, while others believe it will lure new users into the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Another developer claims to achieve the goal without a blockchain soft fork.

The proposal in question, BIP-300 or Bitcoin Drivec­hains, was initially presented in 2017. It proposed sidechains as separate blockchains to complement the main BTC network.

Paul Sztorc, founder of LayerTwo Labs, proposed using blockchains. This would enable BTC migration and the creation of alternative coins.

This is how Bip300 can eliminate all crypto and fiat transactions, leaving only Bitcoin 🍿👇 pic.twitter.com/1TwQsu9ZPj

— LayerTwo Labs (@LayerTwoLabs) July 10, 2023

Bip300 can potentially remove all crypto and fiat transa­ctions, leaving only BTC. On Aug. 22, Luke Dashjr, a Bitcoin core developer, ignited renewed debate by rewriting code, seeking its inclusion in Bitcoin.

BIP-300 proposes a soft fork of Bitcoin that miners would activate, similar to the Taproot soft fork in November 2021. The prior soft fork enabled controversial NFTs emulating Ordinals and BRC-20 tokens this year.

On Sept. 10, Pandora’s CEO, Maxim Orlovsky, made a bold claim on Twitter about blockchain scaling solutions. He claimed to achieve a two-way Bitcoin peg with no soft fork needed.

Just understood that one can do cryptoeconomically-safe trustless 2WP on #Bitcoin without any softfork today – using Prometheus – our 5-year old proposal for arbitrage of any high-load Turing-complete computing on top of Bitcoin: https://t.co/NljYszgkk7 pic.twitter.com/wV5MDuqUov

— Maxim Orlovsky (@dr_orlovsky) September 10, 2023

This accompl­ishment was in direct contra­diction to BIP-300’s require­ments. Performing secure, trustless 2WP on Bitcoin without a soft fork is comprehended.

Drivechains Proposal Sparks Controversy in the Bitcoin Community

In a note, Orlovsky explained the old proposal as an alternative to BIP-300 . The proposal uses an oracle for sidechain validation, ensuring consensus on reported state accuracy.

So far, details are scarce. Orlovsky stated that he would work on a paper that would describe the arrangement “in [an] reasonable way.

Supporters of BIP-300, like Sztorc, believe Drivechains empowers users to tailor blockchain security and Bitcoin functionality. Additionally, Sztorc confidently proposes tremendous benefits with no discernible drawbacks.

Cory Klipp­sten, the BTC-only exchange Swan Bitcoin chief, rejected the proposal. He believes that implem­enting Drive­chains would lead to increased scams on Bitcoin.

One potential downside of Drivechains:

Having lots of scams on Bitcoin will make people and regulators (understandably) think that Bitcoin is full of scams.

— Cory Klippsten 🦢 #Bitcoin is moral tender (@coryklippsten) August 27, 2023

This concern caught regulators’ attention, potentially troubling the cryptocurrency community. Due to widespread scams, drive chains raise Bitcoin legitimacy concerns, unsettling individuals and regulators about digital currency’s credibility.

Pierre Rochard, the Vice President of Research at Bitcoin miner Riot Platf­orms, criti­cized the propo­sal’s messa­ging. His view argument leans on speculative economics, not substantive engineering. He even described it as “pure hopium.”

Drivechain’s “force a softfork to kill sh*tcoins” marketing somehow manages to be both anti-bitcoin and anti-“crypto”. Also pure hopium. It’s a distraction. Strong NACK.

— Pierre Rochard (@BitcoinPierre) August 21, 2023

Drivechain’s strategy contradicts crypto principles and seeks to eliminate smaller coins via a soft fork, challenging Bitcoin’s ethos and industry norms. Furthe­rmore, it seems fueled by unfounded optimism rather than solid evidence. Rather than adding value

Other individuals who voiced their support for BIP-300 included educator Dan Held. He believed Bitcoin could benefit by including speculative assets, attracting new audiences to the cryhavingcy.

Casa co-founder Jameson Lopp was skeptical about sidechains’ threat to BTC main blockchain in the cryptocurrency realm. According to him, no compe­lling concerns have emerged thus far.

True.

Where do you stand on BIP 300. I keep seeing it come up, so I guess I will dig into it.

— James Meece (@JamesNeilMeece) August 30, 2023

Related Reading | UK FCA Grants Crypto Firms Ad Rule Extension: Report

He went on to say that if a sidechain gains value, it might signify that the base chain “should include that sidechain’s features.”