From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32•com>
To: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon•cc>,
"Bitcoin Protocol Discussion"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] What to expect in the next few weeks
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 09:42:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJowKg+MNMLKbB2z4cwT6HfXT7ZF2MW7JqRpN8-4wCusf7MJnw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDq2w=oe94m5mmdhaUECfNwnXa8C5pQ_JaAJxCrndgjsWQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1449 bytes --]
>
>
> I would comment on this point, but I'm not sure I'm "technical enough". I
> have to admit: I've never played tennis.
>
You are technicial enough to read the nacks... everyone is:
https://github.com/JeremyRubin/utxos.org/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc
I can give a summary of the nack arguments here on one sentence: "I am
resisting a consensus change because we don't have consensus"
It's lovely recursive logic
------
The most cogent *technical* arguments against ctv seem fall into 3 camps:
1. APO is better for eltoo:
https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/1518007923896578048?s=20&t=8IUgni_i5jcfSlJ1Gy7T1A
2. CTV doesn't have recursion, but i want recursion... which are swiftly
followed by arguments against recursion:
https://bitcoinops.org/en/newsletters/2022/03/09/#limiting-script-language-expressiveness
(I usually ignore this one)
3. TLUV is super cool for vaults, so why are we even talking about CTV when
TLUV is better?
I like this (positive vibes) summary:
https://raymonddurk.medium.com/bitcoin-after-taproot-86c93fe5cc0c
Nowhere in there would anyone say CTV is "bad".
Just that other opcodes will wind up being used more because they are more
purpose-fit for <insert use case here>
If only we had unlimited resources we could have APO/TLUV;/CTV all ready to
go and be able to evaluate them on a level playing field / signet.
Does this sound about right? Am I missing something?
- Erik
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2903 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-26 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-22 16:38 Michael Folkson
2022-04-23 5:10 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-04-23 10:03 ` Michael Folkson
2022-04-25 22:26 ` Michael Folkson
2022-04-26 5:48 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-26 10:47 ` Anthony Towns
2022-04-26 16:02 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-26 13:53 ` Michael Folkson
2022-04-26 15:20 ` Jeremy Rubin
2022-04-27 5:59 ` alicexbt
2022-04-26 11:40 ` Jorge Timón
2022-04-26 13:42 ` Erik Aronesty [this message]
2022-04-26 6:39 ` Melvin Carvalho
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJowKg+MNMLKbB2z4cwT6HfXT7ZF2MW7JqRpN8-4wCusf7MJnw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=erik@q32$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jtimon@jtimon$(echo .)cc \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox