pull down to refresh
121 sats \ 2 replies \ @Scoresby OP 1h \ parent \ on: Supertestnet's gotcha: BIP16 also confiscated coins bitcoin
This is Vojtěch's response, as well. It looks like him and Super have continued to discuss.
As of an hour ago, this is where Vojtěch was:
I think this is reasonable, but I want to take it further: I want to have the strong stance embodied by nvk at the top of my OP: utxos are sacred, don't fucking take them from anyone.
I'm most definitely okay with a soft fork like P2SH confiscating a dollar of value as collateral damage, I just don't think confiscation itself should be the goal.
I'm not fully okay with this, much like you, but I am sensitive to the point that spending to explicitly unimplemented opcodes to do anyonecanspend, is an appeal to undefined behavior being static. That means no more soft forks ever. So to protect Bitcoin, in case we are confronted with something that absolutely requires a softfork, if you want to donate coin, spend to
OP_TRUE. Any undefined behavior is undefined.If inscriptions were using undefined opcodes, witness programs or other things to put data on the chain, then I'd be okay with dropping support for these. But since they are not, it's just not feasible to prevent past usage.
reply
reply