pull down to refresh
Once the option is available it will become required, no exchange will be allowed to operate if they allow withdrawals to non-cucked outputs. Regulatory capture all over again.
You may not like it, but most will accept it graciously, under the guise of being protected from account hacks or scams. Non-covenant coins will become the exception, eventually you may not even be able to sell it for dollars in any meaningful amount. Sorry Scoresby Jr, no family vacation this year, Daddy has black market coins.
Larping with p2p exchanges can be fun if you're into frivolities, but that's not what moves the coin market.
It's exactly the same as colored coins and other anti-fungibility schemes Bitcoiners used to rail against when they weren't distracted by shit like BIP-110
Receiver's produce addresses
Which is exactly why the vaults use-case for covenants is retarded, but that's a separate matter.
You paint a grim picture of things. I don't see it playing out this way. But perhaps it comes down to how big a market will the black market be. If it gets big enough, the point becomes moot. As much as governments love their authority, it's hard to keep tabs on billions of humans. Unless we build ourselves a nice cage.
In any case, Scoresby jr wil just have to go on vacation to the yakuza opium dens and calabrian wine cellars of the mafia.
It doesn't have to be this way, Bitcoiners could just stop being retarded for a minute and not bandwagon jump when some NGO soy-dev says they should support an OP_Code that will delegate their coins.
You may not like it, but most will accept it graciously, under the guise of being protected from account hacks or scams.
EXACTLY. See the case of Spark.... first they introduce it slowly to make people comfortable and "excited" to use it, then baaaam wil lbe required all over and with a full KYC.
How so? I still supply the withdrawal address, which means I specify the locking script?
You think they won't let me withdraw unless I withdraw to a cucked address? Seems like no one would bother doing that. And it would just become a thing where if you buy on an exchange, you know you can't actually get the bitcoin, which means anyone who wants actual bitcoin won't buy on exchanges.
I don't see how the possibilities with covenants are so endless. Receiver's produce addresses, if the person won't send to my address, it's no different than a bcasher saying they can't send to my address.