pull down to refresh

In Bitcoin, the recipient picks the address (i.e., the output script) that they expect to be paid to. Usage of a covenant construction would be self-selected, it generally cannot be imposed by the sender. If the sender unilaterally decides to send funds to a different output script than indicated by the receiver, the receiver would likely not even notice the payment, and has grounds to not honor the payment.

My comment may have come off as tone deaf, I'm realizing. I do understand the basics of bitcoin transactions, but a covenant script is unfamiliar to me.

I'm trying to think about what it would be used for, about which I can see there have been huge efforts to explain, but I encounter heaps of technical jargon that I don't understand when I try to engage. Not from you, though. It is really interesting that the people who do understand, and whose opinion actually matters seem to have their own preferences based on the techanical merits and pitfalls of each proposal.

Fwiw, I hadn't ever read up on these nor paid attention to any commentary before reading this webpage and I was just pointing out that the language sounds CBDC-esque, put in that way. Maybe it isnt just me, since you and nerd2 sought to clarify the point as well. Is it a common FUD?

reply
755 sats \ 2 replies \ @Murch 18h

Covenants being used to create a whitelist-coin was a big concern when the covenant debate restarted a few years ago. After it was debated for months, the general sentiment settled on the concern being unsubstantiated. About to go to bed, I’m gonna try to write up an example for a covenant tomorrow after the Optech Recap.

reply
298 sats \ 0 replies \ @Kruw 18h

Just checking, you have already read this thread by Robin Linus? https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/perpetually-kycd-coins-using-evil-covenants/556

reply

Looking forward to that!

reply