From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32•com>
To: Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@protonmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Swift Activation - CTV
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 09:32:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJowKgK4nQWjaJ96P-E1yABCVOnTxyAGEwuYFUa9WRD8=6U4TA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zzpp9sp69_QmkUre4YUawBxOLECIfHHUf_OoD8UXXZ8Xwtmr5R62_rlGV2iwLivkST-vWusc0X9horY9qHEHKP2g4GR2ppCAuIE57VANUP0=@protonmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1750 bytes --]
On Tue, Jan 2, 2024, 8:52 AM Michael Folkson <michaelfolkson@protonmail•com>
wrote:
> In the interests of time I'll just pick two to respond to but I don't
> agree with any of your points.
>
> > Covenants allow trustless utxos sharing and also are needed for
> vaulting. The numerous use cases are documented, built out and on signet to
> my knowledge. Check out utxos.org for a good list
>
> Your knowledge is incorrect. As far as I know in the getting on for 2
> years since the first CTV activation talk/attempt literally no one has
> built out a CTV use case and demonstrated it on signet with the possible
> exception of James O'Beirne's OP_VAULT which requires other new opcodes in
> addition to CTV.
>
Nice example, thanks.
>
> > 4. "Best tool for the job" is not the bar. "Safe for all" and "useful
> for some" is the bar.
>
This is the bar, ant CTV has passed it with vaulting alone.
If you want to avoid a chain split with an activation attempt (it is
> possible you don't care but if you do) you have to address concerns others
> have with a particular proposal.
>
You haven't mentioned one safety concern. It's hard to tell if you have
any. There is, of course, the elephant in the room with CTV that is a true
concern that nobody talks about.
The real danger of CTV isn't whether it's the best, and we know it's
nonrecursive. And we can use BIP8, so that isn't an issue either.
And we already have shitcoins on BTC, so sapio shouldn't be your issue (
https://github.com/sapio-lang/sapio)
Why exactly is your problem? You yourself have admitted it's useful for
vaulting, and for reducing the cost of lightning onboarding, even though
you ignored the dozens of other use cases enumerated in detail on utxos.org
and elsewhere.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3976 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-02 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-20 1:44 alicexbt
2023-12-22 1:05 ` Luke Dashjr
2023-12-22 1:56 ` alicexbt
2023-12-22 22:34 ` alicexbt
2023-12-30 8:05 ` Anthony Towns
2023-12-30 8:59 ` Erik Aronesty
2024-01-01 16:37 ` Michael Folkson
2024-01-01 17:11 ` Erik Aronesty
2024-01-02 13:52 ` Michael Folkson
2024-01-02 14:32 ` Erik Aronesty [this message]
2024-01-02 16:24 ` Ryan Breen
2024-01-02 16:43 ` alicexbt
2023-12-30 13:54 ` Michael Folkson
2024-01-03 8:36 ` Anthony Towns
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='CAJowKgK4nQWjaJ96P-E1yABCVOnTxyAGEwuYFUa9WRD8=6U4TA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=erik@q32$(echo .)com \
--cc=aj@erisian$(echo .)com.au \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=michaelfolkson@protonmail$(echo .)com \
/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