Sid is not, contrary to what others replied to you, a proper rolling distro. Particularly during the times when there are freezes for a new stable release, the repositories can become broken in a way that you may not be able to install software you want because its dependency chain is not fulfilled correctly. People who almost never install new software might not notice the issue, as it's not like sid will break what you already have installed -- as long as you don't say yes to a full-upgrade that shows a concerning amount of removals.

I've had experience with it and Arch in my rolling days (I am now a debian stable user, and use flatpaks and pet containers when I need newer software and feel much more at peace with my systems now), and Arch would, in my experience, never be the source of breakage. Things do break at times on a rolling release distro, but in the case of Arch, that would be because something upstream changed in their software, not because of the packaging of the distro itself.

Debian testing is not the answer either. When there are bugs that make it to testing, they can linger for an incredibly long time. At least, on sid, or Arch, it's more likely to happen, but also will get fixed quickly.

IMHO, the current landscape has solved the whole reason that made rolling desirable. With flatpaks and pet containers, there's nothing you could possibly miss, while you run a stable, unchanging system underneath. If you need support for hardware so bleeding edge that there isn't a backported kernel yet, I'd still find it less effort to package my own ( https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-kernel-handbook/ch... describes how to do this succintly. It's not as much work as it sounds ) from upstream until backport repositories support my hardware, than have a fully rolling distro on my computer.