Bitcoin covenants are inevitable

Summary:

The responsibility of maintaining the security of the Bitcoin protocol lies with the Bitcoin software and the core developers. A continued demand for block space is crucial for the protocol's security. It is essential that the Bitcoin software and core developers ensure this demand, which drives the game-theoretical security of the protocol. While the author is confident that demand is high enough to secure the protocol, they believe it should not be left up to stern opinions. The matter of whether covenant tech is necessary for this security requires simulations and proofs, not hype or speculation.In a post to the bitcoin-dev mailing list, alicexbt stated that covenants on Bitcoin will eventually be implemented with a soft fork. They believe that covenants will improve various aspects, including allowing developers to build interesting projects and improving funding for Bitcoin developers and projects. However, John Carvalho responded by stating that none of the items quoted are features or responsibilities of the Bitcoin software or core developers. He believes that CTV (covenant tech) will never be justifiable merely because some people think it is cool or may gain more funding.Alicexbt argues that covenants are not contentious, despite some people spreading misinformation and causing drama on social media. They claim there are zero technical NACKs for CTV and that all the developers who participated in the discussion are okay with it or covenants in general. They suggest that improvements to the review process for soft fork BIPs would be beneficial and that honest opinions should be shared with agreement or disagreement on technical merits. They prefer BIP 8 or an improved version for soft forks but are open to other approaches if they improve Bitcoin. They believe that implementing covenants before the next cycle would provide an opportunity for developers to build interesting things during the bear market.

Updated on: 2023-06-15T21:18:51.362083+00:00