{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub19ewc0eq0w264mmef6rt522dwfryn3tr4e04uartq9dhy83mmygsquw93yr","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub19ewc0eq0w264mmef6rt522dwfryn3tr4e04uartq9dhy83mmygsquw93yr","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-02-14\n📝 Original message:Hello,\n\nI'm opposed to recursive covenants because they allow the government to _gradually_ restrict all bitcoins.\n\nWithout covenants, other miners can fork to a free blockchain, if the government tells miners each transaction to be added in the block. Thus the government cannot impose desires on the Bitcoin community. With covenants, the government gradually forces all companies to use the permissible covenants. There is no free blockchain, and the government controls more bitcoins each day.\n\nBitcoin experts Greg Maxwell and Peter Todd explained this reason and many others on the forum.[1] More experts also agreed, and it's common knowledge. I strongly recommend to support the OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY. It is well reviewed, and it protects the Bitcoin community from the bad effects of covenants. With OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY, we achieve the best of both worlds.\n\nWith best regards,\nLucky Star\n\n[1] Maxwell, Greg. \"CoinCovenants using SCIP signatures, an amusingly bad idea.\" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=278122.0;all\n\n\u003e On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 08:34:30PM -0800, Jeremy Rubin via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Whether [recursive covenants] is an issue or not precluding this sort\n\u003e \u003e of design or not, I defer to others.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e For reference, I believe the last time the merits of allowing recursive\n\u003e covenants was discussed at length on this list[1], not a single person\n\u003e replied to say that they were opposed to the idea.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e I would like to suggest that anyone opposed to recursive covenants speak\n\u003e for themselves (if any intelligent such people exist). Citing the risk\n\u003e of recursive covenants without presenting a credible argument for the\n\u003e source of that risk feels to me like (at best) stop energy[2] and (at\n\u003e worst) FUD.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e -Dave\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e [1] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-July/019203.html\n\u003e [2] http://radio-weblogs.com/0107584/stories/2002/05/05/stopEnergyByDaveWiner.html\n\u003e (thanks to AJ who told me about stop energy one time when I was\n\u003e producing it)\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220214/6ec4b8cd/attachment-0001.html\u003e"}