41 sats \ 5 replies \ @south_korea_ln 23 Jul \ on: Why do Taproot gets so much hate?? bitcoin
I heard at some point a big critique is that because both Taro and RGB use client side validation, you lose global consensus. So on the hand it sacrifices strongly on one of the core property of Bitcoin, but also it allows nefarious actors to take advantage of it. The critics kept hammering on this point while the developers kept ignoring it or claiming they solved that issue. Not sure what's true or how it has evolved since then.
reply
You seem to know more about it. So how does the receiver know for sure the asset hasn't been given to someone else simultaneously?
reply
Thank you for that insight. I have learned to take such critiques with a grain of salt because most of the time, even if 100% accurate, they're solvable, or even a fully conscious and temporal trade-off for the sake of a quick PoC. It happens even in the world of mechanical engineering: I have made some quick designs with obviously temporal and easily solvable trade-offs to be critiqued for them like if the overall concept itself was flawed. I have seen that happening with LN itself, for in it's early stages it had blatant flaws which ended up not being inherent to the concept itself and where all solved one by one over time. I have also learned to not to take a critique that's more than one year old, I'm amazed to see devs (the ones who know the dynamic of the tech) stubbornly repeating old observations.
reply
I agree.
I think the most vocal criticast i knew at that point was mostly frustrated by the fact that they did not want to acknowledge that limitation. Otherwise he thought the tech had some very valuable merits so he was not against it being developed. He just wanted more honesty.
The Cashu guys took a different approach. Calle always emphasized the sacrifices made, with a mint being able to rug you the most noticeable one, hence they seem to be getting a pass from the vocal maximalists.
reply
That's the way! Grown up devs there
reply