I agree that they don't need decentralization, but I'm wondering if the proposed protocols are the superior choice regardless, because of their effectiveness and ready for production-ness. The control over the smart contracts themselves may still be centralized while the platform they operate on are not.
With a sidechain, it's possible to run LN directly on top of it. The BOLT specs are not tied to the bitcoin chain and you can run a multi-chain lightning implementation. It should also be possible to perform atomic swaps between a main-chain lightning and a side-chain lightning too, which would cut fees.
Is there a reason why the electronic money in this case couldn't be CBDCs?
The CBDC gives the ruling party too much power over citizens. It could, for instance, cut off your ability to spend your money if you don't vote for them. Banana republics are not just things of old - they're becoming the norm again.
The ability of citizens to peacefully protest, potentially by withholding their money from government, is essential to the long-term viability of a democracy. A government which has full control over its citizens finances will not remain a democratic one for long.
Comments
With a sidechain, it's possible to run LN directly on top of it. The BOLT specs are not tied to the bitcoin chain and you can run a multi-chain lightning implementation. It should also be possible to perform atomic swaps between a main-chain lightning and a side-chain lightning too, which would cut fees.
The CBDC gives the ruling party too much power over citizens. It could, for instance, cut off your ability to spend your money if you don't vote for them. Banana republics are not just things of old - they're becoming the norm again.
The ability of citizens to peacefully protest, potentially by withholding their money from government, is essential to the long-term viability of a democracy. A government which has full control over its citizens finances will not remain a democratic one for long.