change my mind: covenants are just one more form of client side validation primitives
its like what taproot assets is doing for shitcoins, except you dont need a whole new data format because the client-side data *is* bitcoin txs
Discussion
what would be the server-side data?
it’s written explicitly into the chain and made globally available to all nodes via block propagation; see BRC20s
It's more like a primitive that allows you to skip client side validation in exchange for higher fees.
I don’t understand what you’re saying, can you explain how you arrived at this description?
Without it you have to coordinate LN multisig beforehand, interactively but it's just a normal transaction. With it you can stick the rules into the transaction but it increases its size.
client side validation is where you put a hash into the blockchain as a proof of some statement or a commitment, so rather than being able to just use whats written in the blockchain to understand who owns what, now you need more data to verify ownership
CTV does this: it puts a hash into the chain and you need a separate set of data to prove that that hash actually means *you* can spend (some?) of those coins
Yes but to spend it you need chain again. The cost is just paid later. And I think it's worse. Statistically, fees will rise over time so paying the cost now is better than later.