I think it’s an interesting idea. I agree with Jim, but what wasn’t mentioned was that while being “under the hood” is good for end users, DBCs combined with BFT decentralised mints, is groundbreaking, and something we want to highlight for developers and technical folk from entrepreneurs to academics.
So the question for me is how can we do that.
I see a key point being those who know about DBCs or who go off and read up about them elsewhere, may conclude that Safe DBCs are centralised, which is an important problem with existing implementations. This is especially so in the eyes of people who care about decentralisation which is an important early adopter/developer demographic for us.
With existing DBC implementations you have to trust the mint, which is something we should debunk right away as it is a game changer.
So a key point to make in every technical conversation will I think be that Safe Digital Bearer Certificates (DBCs) use decentralised mints which are Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT).
Then we can explain what Safe DBCs are capable of, and what will become possible later, given their ability to hold and manage ownership of assets such as fungible and none fungible tokens (NFTs) with unparalleled scalability, negligible cost, energy efficiency, security, anonymity etc.