Drivechains are just a custodial federation where miners control the funds. This has negative impact on the miner's main job which is to advance the chain without any reorgs or empty blocks.
false, lightning based cashu is a custodial fedimint where mints have control over the IOU's they print for your sats, drivechains are not, this is either a technically inept interpretation unfamiliar with the mechanism at play or outright dishonesty. A six month poll vote on the state or shape of something is not control or a fedimint.
However, this combination of incentives is fatal. Bitcoin ALREADY suffers with having insufficient fees on the
it would be if that was what drivechain was, but its not so its not fatal. BMM drives MORE fees to L1 because each tx on a L2 is a fee paying L1 tx, whereas lighting can have an arbitrary number L2 tx's between old and heavy channel maintainers that do not reflect in their final settlement on L1. All while being trusted and custodial. Drivechains maintains self-custody AND each tx is reflected is proportionally mirrored by a fee paying and thus security/network supporting tx on L1
false, lightning based cashu is a custodial fedimint where mints have control over the IOU's they print for your sats, drivechains are not, this is either a technically inept interpretation unfamiliar with the mechanism at play or outright dishonesty. A six month poll vote on the state or shape of something is not control or a fedimint.
it would be if that was what drivechain was, but its not so its not fatal. BMM drives MORE fees to L1 because each tx on a L2 is a fee paying L1 tx, whereas lighting can have an arbitrary number L2 tx's between old and heavy channel maintainers that do not reflect in their final settlement on L1. All while being trusted and custodial.
Drivechains maintains self-custody AND each tx is reflected is proportionally mirrored by a fee paying and thus security/network supporting tx on L1