pull down to refresh
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @fanis 9 May 2022 \ on: Thoughts on BIP-119 - OP_CTV debate ? bitcoin
I like CTV and what Jeremy tried to do with it: proposing a quite minimal implementation of Covenants so that we can take this first step without too much risks. On the other hand, I think that's what got him:
- some people don't want CTV because it doesn't provide full capability covenants while still requiring a soft fork (and the associated risks) and are more in favor of waiting for another implementation that might take more to the table in one soft fork.
- other people repeat the non sense they see online and believe CTV is extremely dangerous because it enables some covenants. Well, it's not.
- other people don't understand what covenants are.
On the other hand, I'm not even sure Jeremy himself strongly believed the activation would happen as he laid down in his plan. To me, the purpose of the move was much more to make the discussion finally happen, and gather as much feedback (negative and positive) as possible. In this respect, Jeremy's strategy succeeded tremendously. Now, I just hope it didn't alienate too much a part of the community to the sole idea of Bitcoin Covenants in the process.