In reality, if somebody wants to use Cardano as a second layer, it would be difficult to prevent that (for Hoskinson or any Cardano community member) due to its expressive smart contract language. Threshold's tBTC is an example for a sidechain concept which has been adopted on several blockchains without "permission" from the "founders" of these blockchains.
Of course the Cardano community/team can decide what to do with their development funds (=premined coins they still own) however. And if they want to invest the funds in a model for a better sidechain, why not?
Note that it will be very likely possible to adapt this model to other blockchains, too. At least if it's open source (and I would highly recommend the Cardano folks to not even try to implement some closed-source or restricted-source solution).
That are my thoughts on the subject and why I can't find anything really negative about the announcement. I still haven't investigated the technical details of the BitcoinOS system well, however. Maybe it's a centralized system with some technobabble (like so many
of those I have reviewed), and then of course the solution wouldn't mean really progress towards good Layer-2's.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I agree that Cardano's expressive smart contract capabilities make it flexible enough for second-layer solutions, even without direct involvement or permission from its core team or community. The tBTC example highlights how interoperability and decentralization can flourish organically across ecosystems, which is an exciting prospect for Cardano as well.
Regarding development funds, it does make sense for the Cardano team to invest strategically in fostering better sidechain models. Open-source development, as you mention, would indeed be the ideal path forward, ensuring adaptability and collaboration across blockchains while maintaining transparency and decentralization.
As for BitcoinOS, I share your cautious approach. Evaluating technical details thoroughly will be critical to determining whether this is genuinely a step forward or just another centralized construct with limited value. Lets see how it evolves!
