pull down to refresh

69 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek 15h \ parent \ on: Why all Bitcoiners should support covenants bitcoin
Right now you can do some form of covenants on the main chain simply by creating the transactions that would be the exit points of a UTXO and then throwing the private key away. As far as I know, no one really does this.
Isn't this basically what Spark is doing?
Also, @benthecarman replied this:
the annex is not used for inscriptions and taproot did not make take only 1 tx instead of 2. this is misinformation.
also on "there is no market demand", the fact that the primary way people use lightning is through custodial system is a pretty clear show of failing of the current system. maybe there is no demand for self custodial payments, but we'll never know if we don't try
write
preview
202 sats \ 1 reply \ @lightcoin OP 15h
Spark is an implementation of a statechain, which does something different than a covenant: statechains enable the offchain transfer of UTXOs by essentially passing around the private key to a UTXO offchain. The reason this is considered secure is because it's actually only one private key in a 2-of-2 multisig, with the other key owned by a central "statechain entity", who "promises" to only co-sign transfers that conform to the protocol. There are more details to it than that, but that is the gist. I'm not aware of any improvements that covenants can make specific to statechains.
A "real world" example of a key deletion covenant would be what Rewind wallet does.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 13h
Thank you! So this is why he said "no one really does this" because Spark is not a covenant (onchain), but a statechain (offchain), right?
reply