pull down to refresh

Do you think we will see a quantum resistant soft fork activated on Bitcoin in the next two years?

We will if I have any say in it

And it will be sooner than 2 years

I'm interested in lots of soft fork efforts right now

reply

Bitcoin is not exactly famous for its speed of activating soft forks. I will certainly be surprised if we see successful forks for both BIP 110 and quantum resistance.

What is your feeling about a covenants soft fork?

reply

I've followed covenants efforts closely, and have seen them bikeshedded into oblivion. Nobody worked harder or smarter than Jeremy Rubin.

At this point, I'm not too hung up on it. CTV would've been nice, and so would have Sapio (finite state machines on bitcoin).

Maybe we'll see them one day but for now I think it's pretty bleak for covenants.

Also respect Steven Roose's efforts, such as Second Ark and OP_TXHASH.

reply

So now I'm curious how we will avoid the same fate for quantum resistance soft forks. It seems like the infinite bikeshed (which could be a great horror story concept) will strike again.

How do we avoid it?

reply

Well, that's already happened, considering 360 took a massive amount of review and back and forth, and even then, the work is still not finished.

But QR efforts have something going for them that covenants do not: a real world forcing function.

reply

What is currently missing in 360?

reply

We need to finish the 110 compatibility effort, address SegWit spending rule ambiguity, and scrub the BIP of any of Isabel Foxen Duke's "contributions".

reply

Can you give an example where the BIP itself is not agnostic to 110? I must have missed something!