pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ealvar39 24 Mar \ parent \ on: "Lightning self custody works for 100 million users" "But it needs 10 billion!!" bitcoin
I've been researching and discussing this a lot recently. I think the main fear is from recursive covenant op code proposals like OP_CAT.
The argument against non-recursive covenants like CTV & CSFS seems to be more centered on whether this is actually even necessary right now given low network demand.
That's been the discussion so far, the thing, if I'm not mistaken (BIG IF as I'm no coder) is that recursive covenants are only recursive within themselves, so the worst that can happen is that they eat up the memory of a node trying to validate the whole TX because of the recursive execution of the script, but there's been a lot of FUD around recursive covenants being able to propagate themselves as if Bitcoin was an account model chain and not an UTXO model where only the receiver writes the spending conditions.
When it comes to CTV+CSFS lack of demand's argument, I believe Steven Roose makes the best counter-argument:
In fact, BitVM is a good example of the result of the lack of expressiveness in bitcoin’s protocol. It is essentially a bad version MATT, but built as a workaround around the lack of covenants in bitcoin. To me this shows that there is great demand for this expressiveness and developers are going to extreme lengths to obtain equivalent behavior in the ugliest possible ways.
reply