1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
|
Return-Path: <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C90C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 3 Jun 2022 18:39:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44597824F4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 3 Jun 2022 18:39:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id VRKi7fgOP8PG
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 3 Jun 2022 18:39:41 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40138.protonmail.ch (mail-40138.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.138])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 218DF81DAB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 3 Jun 2022 18:39:40 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 18:39:34 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1654281578; x=1654540778;
bh=lTGw5DBrfXorSkNHa1G90aT8wpNW9Js09U5I0C/MJNc=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:
Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID;
b=ORMcfmFYjnKnxolxUT10Vmq4pUhAKVYqMJ0lKL3WbdBkAK1iGmstsywxEkJco2c9b
Re0AgwQ2X+LluucAbQUt15AmD2rCtcxHEaxDJbFKXbmouhxFY2dS/b2eBbx2N5vTrN
DelM8ckn8uKJCjpnkJcP6yN99JfyT9+AJywbRcDAozHr0cOb6+frQL/1G67j8123bu
C5g3ILsVpPcNbMGAe6buFZlDpvmsiW+O5fzL1IA5oF75jiyT5c/MPhMltWMlerTNMN
iDNaEtwl79UdA0KCYBIeymujOYXcjdHMqGINwE5sgO0w/WFVs3tRIP5VZYrepKFbyW
aWDLdXJpEu3Fw==
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <QOWIpROGDv5HHP2GsDiSOsTJ9TVZhFeSP3C03_e2Z3XtOKC_4N5GJtxbdlxuhErvhLZXo1Rn_7SWAQ9XRPwHFuYyArZryTVENefDZuGTAYA=@protonmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 18:43:57 +0000
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 18:39:42 -0000
Note: This email is an opinion and not an attack on bitcoin
Covenants on bitcoin will eventually be implemented with a soft fork. CTV i=
s the easiest and best possible way OP_TX looks good as well. Apart from th=
e technical merits, covenants will improve a few other things:
- Developers can build interesting projects with real demand in market.
- Students learn Sapio and not just solidity.
- Better tooling could be available for application developers.
- Maybe we see bitcoin developer hackathons in different countries.
- Demand for block space might increase, it wont be just exchanges and coin=
join.
- Funding of bitcoin developers and projects might improve. Wont need to co=
nvince a few people for grants.
**Why covenants are not contentious?**
Some people may write paragraphs about CTV being contentious, spread misinf=
ormation and do all types of drama, politics etc. on social media but there=
are zero technical NACKs for CTV. We have discussed other covenant proposa=
ls in detail on mailing list and IRC meetings with an open minded approach.
All the developers that participated in the discussion are either okay with=
CTV or OP_TX or covenants in general.
**How and when should covenants be implemented in Bitcoin?**
I don't think we should wait for years anticipating a proposal that everyon=
e will agree on or argue for years to pretend changes are hard in Bitcoin. =
We should improve the review process for soft fork BIPs and share honest op=
inions with agreement, disagreement on technical merits.
I prefer BIP 8 or improved BIP 8 for soft fork but I won't mind anything el=
se being used if that improves Bitcoin. Covenants implemented in Bitcoin be=
fore the next cycle would provide opportunity for developers to build inter=
esting things during the bear market. Ossification supporters also believe =
there is some window that will close soon, maybe doing changes considering =
each case individually will be a better approach. CTV is not a rushed soft =
fork, less people followed the research and it was not mentioned on social =
media repeatedly by the respected developers like other soft forks.
/dev/fd0
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
|
