pull down to refresh

Depends how much I am locking. I would lock up .1 BTC to send to the future for my daughter. She is 7 so lets say 18 years. She can have it when she is 25.
20 years is a long time. What of there's a fork? Or if time locks don't quite work the same way? Since you have to keep the keys anyway, why not just not give her the keys till she's 25. Long term time locks seem like they carry unnecessary risks to me.
reply
132 sats \ 2 replies \ @BeeRye 23h
why would it matter if there is a fork? is it because you want to be able to sell the btc fork you don't want ?
reply
Definitely the you can't sell issue. Maybe by the tune you can the alt fork is worthless.
But for instance the quantum resistant fork proposals all involve migrating all coins to new addresses. Timelocked coins are stuck. Some of the proposals further propose burning coins that don't move.
It's not hard to imagine other scenarios where you need to move your coins and a long timespan timelock could wreck you.
reply
These are good points. A good argument for shorter term timelocks and just rolling into a new one if you want something longer term.
reply
102 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 22h
Fork shouldn't matter because you get both coins. One would imagine if time locks don't work the same way there would have to be some backwards compatibility to existing time locks or a work around but agreed there is more risk. I am just saying I would consider it for small portion of my stack and for a specific purpose.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @BeeRye 20h
i use it for my fidelity bond for using JAM.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 20h
That's a good point about forks.
reply