A proposed solution to #Bitcoin scalability and lack of expressivity is the addition of new covenant opcodes. Each proposal has its own advantages, disadvantages, and trade-offs, but all include a certain level of Miner Extractable Value (MEV) risk. Given these inherent traits in the nature of programmable money, what level of risk is acceptable?

We explore this question by examining MEV and the limitations of Bitcoin Script. We also look at some of the covenant proposals, such as CAT + CSFS and CTV, as well as the new Simplicity blockchain language, an alternative to Bitcoin Script that is more expressive with static analysis and formal verification.

The latest from Blockstream Research:

https://blog.blockstream.com/miner-extractable-value-mev-and-programmable-money-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Bitcoin development ⚡ 💪

sounds like bringing ETH erros to L1

You should ditch that linked in profile link and replace it with your nostr one. 😗

So basically they are trying to create the equivalent of CCRs that would be found in a deed to land. Wouldn’t this inevitably lead to a necessity for oracles? Based on this, I’m in the leave it alone camp.