This publication was first published in Medium.
This is the justification of our shared opinion on the support wiki of the agreements.
Criteria
The original script objective was to provide users with a language sequence language general enough, training them to create and experiment with their own types of transactions. In essence, the objective was to give users the freedom to design and program their own assets in the chain.
Satoshi has warned against proposals from scope from the beginning, each addressing only specific use cases. These proposals are aimed at allowing limited functionalities instead of addressing the broader need for expressiveness and programability required for Bitcoin’s long -term scalability. Any proposal that has been designed to improve a unique and narrow feature is considered undesirable. Do not adopt this approach has led to stagnation in discussions: nobody is completely satisfied because each proposal does not address the various cases of use that others want to see implemented. Instead of participating in constant debates about incremental improvements, we must explore the entire function of functionality that Bitcoin needs. In doing so, we can go beyond the current conflict cycle and create a more unified vision for the future of Bitcoin.
The script, like any other programming language, is never designed only for a single application or to create a single program. It is built to support fundamental construction blocks. The central design of the script does not necessarily dictates how it will be used, but ensures that its components are not combined so that it damages users. If the new proposals improve the trust model for end users without significantly worsening their impact on system incentives, they do not introduce any substantial risk and, therefore, can be considered for activation.
We use the generality criteria to evaluate several proposals for the code of operations. We would also prefer a proposal that has demonstrated sufficient interest and security.
Op_cat
The most general
Op_Cat is the most powerful and general option proposal of our six years of experience working with full -time Bitcoin script since 2018. It is also the only operation code introduced by Satoshi himself.
The pact is only one of the many use cases that allows, including:
You can find a complete list here.
Most uses
BIP 118 (Sighash_anyprevout, Apo) and BIP 119 (op_checktemplinify, CTV) have been enabled in Signet for almost two years, since the late 2022. More recently, BIP 347 (OP_CAT) was activated, since it has been available for six months. Despite being active for only 1/4 of time, there are significantly more chain transactions that use OP_CAT (74K) compared to APO (1K) or CTV (16), which translates into 300x and 18500x plus use in a given period.
More recently, Fractal Bitcoin, a lateral scale that reuses the Bitcoin code base, has integrated OP_CAT to improve its programability. By reactivating this operation code, fractal bitcoin can support more sophisticated intelligent contract functionalities, which are not feasible in the Bitcoin Mainnet without such improvements. This includes the possibility of creating and administering tokens directly in the block chain through protocols such as Cat20, which are validated by miners and applied by intelligent contracts in the consensus layer. They provide levels of programability, safety and decentralization absent in BRC20/runes. In three months, developers have created decentralized applications (DAPPS) such as Dex, Votation, BTC decentralized wrapped and bomb. More applications are approaching. Dozens of millions of transactions have been generated in just three months, which represents millions of dollars of real value assets, instead of assets without value in SIGNET.
Op_Cat has seen more interest in developers and users in the real world, than any alternative operation code.
More proven in battle
Op_Cat was reintroduced in Bitcoin Cash (BCH) during the network update in 2018 and later in BSV. The liquid network has op_cat since its inception, in addition to fractal. There have been dozens of millions of transactions that use it and there has been zero exploit because of this.
Common erroneous concepts
Op_cat is “inefficient”: this is because op_cat is generic and is not adapted to a specific use case such as the covenant. Efficiency can be improved after it is demonstrated that a use case is frequently used, by introducing dedicated operation codes. Premature optimization is the root of all evil. Op_cat MEV causes: the root cause of most MEV, if not all, in Bitcoin is to replace with rate (RBF). That is why Mempool Sniping prevails today even without op_cat. There is not enough evidence to show that OP_CAT will substantially increase Mev, after 6 years of running in other blockchains worth thousands. Op_Cat is difficult to reason: so is any other operation code, since they are a low level assembly. In practice, you need a high -level programming language, such as SCRYPT, to abstract operating codes, as well as program intelligent Ethereum contracts using solidity, not EVM operating codes directly. Op_cat cause centralization: the reality is that the most flexible layer 2 solutions require a more flexible base layer, which op_cat enables. The only alternative to this is to depend on third -party trusted, so OP_CAT can help decentralization, since we have witnessed to the validation tokens of miners such as CAT20, without centralized indexers.
Op_csfs/checksigfromstack
OP_CSFS is a proposed bitcoin operation code that would improve the Bitcoin script by allowing a signature against arbitrary data to be verified, instead of all transaction data. It can be emulated using op_cat and op_checksig. An OP_CSFS Independent Operating Code can be more efficient. Op_cat should be activated together to analyze signed serialized data. For example, a Oracle can attest to the price of BTC at a specific time, who signs the serialized price and the time mark together.
OP_CTV/Checktemplingify
OP_CTV applies funds that will be spent only through a transaction that coincides with precision in a predefined template. It has several deficiencies.
It only allows a limited form, therefore, not general, of pact, which was specifically designed to improve the functionality of the previous transactions chains signed. It does not allow the recursive pact.
Others
We cover some other proposals briefly below.
OP_VAULT: It was specifically designed to enable Vault, which can be implemented by OP_CAT without op_vault txhash: a strict superconunto of OP_CTV, but still limited in itself. Op_Cat can make it more powerful to introspection not only current spending transaction, but also its main transactions. Anyprevout (Sighash_apo): Specifically adapted to optimize rays.
***
(1) Op_Cat can be used to divide a bytestring A in subcadena B and C, passing B and C and verifying that they concentrate A.
LOOK: SCRYPT wants to take Hackathon’s initiative to more people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncwdirkgr0q Title = “YouTube Video Player” FRAMBORDER = “0” allowed = “accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encryption-media; gyroscope; photo image; origin” tentishullscreen = “”>>>