0 sats \ 4 replies \ @grayruby 25 Aug \ parent \ on: Sunday Survey: Do you want covenants? bitcoin
What's your thoughts on covenants @k00b?
Seems logical to me but as a non-technical person I am unsure about the trade-offs and potential unintended consequences as we saw with Taproot.
A useful model for thinking about this stuff is Black Markets. That is, restrictive rule sets, especially ones that restrict normal human desires, usually increase and incentivize worse behavior than they set out to prevent. I think this is what's playing out in bitcoin right now. By excessively restricting bitcoin script, it limits bitcoin's utility for earnest bitcoin-as-money usage, renders earnest usage uncompetitive with exploitative use, and makes perversion of bitcoin more profitable.
So, with a gun to my head today, I'd prefer we activate GSR and just make bitcoin script more expressive.
Inscriptions were possible before Taproot. Given my thinking above, it's not important what exactly made inscriptions technically possible. I'm more concerned with what makes inscriptions profitable and it's largely that there's not enough demand for blockspace that outstrips storing terrible art.
reply
reply
It’s simplistic but I see two general directions to preventing “bad” bitcoin usage:
- Rules that can’t be misused (laws that can’t be broken)
- Rules that allow people do what they want so long as they don’t harm other people (natural law)
- imo results in a natural ratio of good people relative to bad people, good participants greatly outnumber the bad, and bad people have fewer incentives to be bad
reply