The difference is, the covenant restrictions you decide for yourself when you generate the recieve address. Nobody but you can restrict the future spends....

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

that would make sense. it still has the issue of being more easily scalable for this abuse. with a recursive covenant, the encumberance stays with the utxo as it's spent. as I understand it, you end up in a tainted Bitcoin scenario. at least the "tainted" Bitcoin we have now can have their history severed with a coinjoin