Best to say “no” for as long as possible. Feature creep is inevitable. Experiment on shitcoins first.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

It seems like people could build other layers that are tied to Bitcoin without fucking with the base layer. That's sort of how I see things like Lightning, ecash, etc.

What’s your specific worry?

Censorship risks arise from flexible covenants, allowing governments or corporations to enforce

- Allowlists: Bitcoins can only be spent to approved addresses.

- Denylists: Bitcoins cannot be sent to specific addresses (e.g., sanctioned entities)

Even if these restrictions aren't feasible in the initial implementation, introducing programmable spending conditions could increase Bitcoin's vulnerability to regulatory pressure

Ya i dont really see the point of this. Why do we NEED spending conditions? Inheritance planning seems like a thing you could handle just fine without this.

Psyop? 🤷‍♂️

i mean just read something like: “allow a script to prevent an authorized spender from spending”

that ain’t bitcoin