pull down to refresh

1000 sats for evidence of Taproot opposition in 2021
1649 sats \ 20 comments \ @Scoresby 28 Jun bitcoin

One symptom of the BIP 110 debate is that I've seen a number of people saying that Taproot was a mistake.

I like Taproot. I think there are many great things we are going to see from it.

But also, my memory of the discussion before and the activation of Taproot is that almost everybody was in support of it.

Here are some examples:

I'm sure there were some Bitcoiners who were against it, though. So, I'm offering 1000 sats to the first ten items that post evidence of opposition to Taproot from 2021. Screenshots + links are best.

1,000 sats paid 2 times
write
compose
Scoresby's bounties
102 sats \ 2 replies \ @therealsaitama0 29 Jun freebie

Evidence of Taproot opposition in 2021:

  1. Luke Dashjr called Speedy Trial "an attack on Bitcoin" (Apr 2021)
    https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-development-controversy-speedy-trial-taproot-activation/
  2. Luke Dashjr — PSA: Taproot loss of quantum protections (Mar 2021)
    https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-March/018642.html
  3. Mark Friedenbach — "Why I'm against Taproot" (Mar 2021)
    https://freicoin.substack.com/p/why-im-against-taproot
  4. Nikita Zhavoronkov (Blockchair) — Taproot privacy threat (Jan 2021)
    https://forklog.com/en/taproot-a-privacy-threat-why-the-forthcoming-bitcoin-upgrade-is-drawing-criticism/
  5. bitcointalk: "Taproot is useless, minor improvement" (Nov 2021)
    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5371662.msg58452920
  6. LOT=true vs LOT=false developer split — 19 devs opposed the Speedy Trial approach (Feb 2021)
    https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Taproot_activation_proposal_202102
reply
103 sats \ 0 replies \ @Murch 29 Jun
  1. LOT=true vs LOT=false developer split — 19 devs opposed the Speedy Trial approach (Feb 2021)
    https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Taproot_activation_proposal_202102

Only five of the nineteen people supporting LOT=true exclusively wanted LOT=true, 14 were fine with either LOT=true or LOT=false. Anyway, that’s just about the activation, not Taproot itself.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby OP 29 Jun

These are good links! Attach a wallet or post a lightning address or a invoice and I will send you sats.

  1. It may be a little pedantic, but I was hoping for criticism of Taproot itself. I have a number of posts by Luke that exhibit strong support for Taproot, even if he was not pleased with the activation method.
  2. The quantum discussion around Taproot is interesting and this is a great link! It's interesting to note that Luke says "I do not personally see this as a reason to NACK Taproot" and Corallo says "This has been discussed ad nauseam, and it all seems to fall apart once its noted just how much Bitcoin could be stolen by any QC-wielding attacker due to address reuse. Ultimately, no "pause" can solve this issue, and, if we learned about a QC attacker overnight (instead of slowly over time), there isn't anything that a non Taproot Bitcoin could do that a Taproot Bitcoin couldn't."
  3. The Mark Friedenbach example is excellent. @1440000bytes also posted it. Thank you.
  4. The Nikita Zhavoronkov link is exactly the kind of thing I was looking for.
  5. This bitcointalk thread is not exactly critical of Taproot. pretty much everyone, even the OP seem to be in favor of it. But the OP does link to an article that has a bunch of shitcoiners expressing criticism of Bitcoin more than Taproot. But I hadn't read it before, so it was interesting.
  6. I see the debate about LOT=true vs LOT=false as a criticism of activation method, not Taproot. See # 1.
reply
79 sats \ 1 reply \ @BITC0IN 29 Jun
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby OP 29 Jun

Excellent!

reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @fitgympro21_afk 15 Aug freebie

One 2021 example I don’t see above: Edward Snowden’s May 2021 criticism of Taproot itself, rather than its activation method.

At the Ethereal Summit he said, “Taproot does not fix Bitcoin’s privacy problem,” and argued that fragmented address space could make forensic flow analysis easier.

Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRsvz6pRtZE
Contemporary report (May 10, 2021): https://dailyhodl.com/2021/05/10/bitcoin-failing-terribly-on-privacy-says-whistleblower-edward-snowden-heres-why/
Contemporary discussion (May 8, 2021): https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/n7r5nx/

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @DP0604 30 Jun -100 sats

@Scoresby You said you'd give 1000 sats to anyone who showed you proof. I still haven't seen my 1000. 👀

1 sat \ 3 replies \ @DP0604 28 Jun -100 sats

The activation of Taproot in November 2021 was one of Bitcoin's most anticipated updates.

Although the update itself was widely celebrated, the process for activating it and the long-term consequences generated minor friction within the community:

Subsequent controversies over unforeseen uses:

Later, critical voices within the community (such as developer Jimmy Song) argued that Taproot opened the door to a new "social attack surface." They pointed out that the new scripting features facilitated the recording of non-financial data on the chain, giving rise to the phenomenon of Ordinals and BRC-20 tokens, which some purists considered a misuse of the network.

https://es.tradingview.com/news/cryptonews:ecb6560e8094b:0-taproot-enabled-bitcoin-spam-by-ignoring-social-attack-vectors-says-dev/

103 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 29 Jun -420 sats

https://m.stacker.news/146715

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @MostLively 26 Sep freebie -30 sats

Here's one: Edward Snowden, at the Ethereal Summit in May 2021, said Taproot could actually make Bitcoin privacy worse. Most Bitcoin devs disagreed with him, but that's a named, public figure opposing the upgrade itself on the record, pre-activation. Source: Decrypt, "What Is Taproot? The Privacy-Focused Bitcoin Upgrade" (section "Who doesn't support Taproot?") https://decrypt.co/70598/what-is-taproot-proposed-bitcoin-upgrade?amp=1

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @hacerplata 1 Oct freebie -30 sats

Four more, all criticizing Taproot itself rather than the activation method:

  1. Craig Wright, "Taproot: Building a mixer" (CoinGeek, Mar 27, 2022) — https://coingeek.com/taproot-building-a-mixer/ — "Taproot does nothing to protect privacy. On the contrary, the mere use of Taproot invalidates many transactions," and he argues it is "designed to facilitate the integration of money laundering into the system." 2022, per your "I'd even accept 2022."
  2. The non-Snowden half of the May 2021 privacy feud (Decrypt, May 10, 2021) — https://decrypt.co/70470/bitcoin-privacy-feud-erupts-edward-snowden-pans-long-awaited-taproot-upgrade — the Snowden portion is already claimed here, but the same article carries two more named critics: Ari Paul (BlockTower CIO): "Core devs have clearly not prioritized privacy... We could have mixing or other privacy tech built into the Core client"; Chris Blec: "real anonymity is needed to maintain privacy in today's world of pervasive surveillance. It's sad that anonymity is not a priority for Bitcoin core." Both pre-activation, both aimed at what Taproot does and doesn't do.
  3. John Todaro (Needham) on Taproot's unmet promise (CryptoSlate, Nov 17, 2021) — https://cryptoslate.com/bitcoin-taproot-has-so-far-failed-to-live-up-to-expectation-is-there-more-to-come/ — questions whether Taproot can broaden Bitcoin beyond store of value at all, and the piece documents the -11% reception in the week it went live. Criticism of what Taproot delivered, not how it activated.
  4. Udi Wertheimer: "Taproot is a scam" (Bitcoinist, Nov 18, 2021) — https://bitcoinist.com/does-taproot-actually-enable-smart-contracts-on-bitcoin-the-debate-rages-on/ — argues the smart-contract benefits were oversold since Bitcoin can't run expressive contracts even after the upgrade. Caveat: the article frames him as trolling, so weigh it accordingly.

Deliberately skipped the BeInCrypto "Useless, Minor Improvement" piece — the bitcointalk link already claimed in this thread is a mirror of that exact article.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @questgoods 4 Oct freebie -30 sats

New 2021 evidence — critics of Taproot itself from BeInCrypto's roundup "Bitcoin Taproot Upgrade is 'Useless, Minor Improvement' of Outdated Tech, Say Critics" (Nov 16, 2021):

https://beincrypto.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-is-useless-minor-improvement-of-outdated-tech-say-critics/

1. Steve Hanke (Nov 2021) — Professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University and well-known Bitcoin critic, ridiculed the Taproot upgrade:

"Bitcoin just announced its first upgrade since 2017…Good news for money laundering, tax evasion, and..."

2. Marek, software developer (Nov 2021) — called Taproot a "minor improvement to a technology that is outdated":

"This is the technology that was used in Monero years ago. While other blockchains like Ethereum implement..."

3. Cryptowhale, prominent Bitcoin bear (Nov 2021) — dismissed Taproot as:

"some useless and overhyped tiny change to Bitcoin's code that really doesn't do anything"

All three criticize Taproot itself (not the activation method), dated November 2021 around activation. None of these names have been posted in this thread yet.

1 sat \ 2 replies \ @evestacker 29 Jun

deleted by author

reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby OP 29 Jun

It probably would have been beneficial had you read that thread before posting it.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @evestacker 29 Jun

I did but I reliase I messed up with the link 🔗 attachment.

reply