Where it gets difficult is the revocations. Clients need to know if a delegation is still alive at any given moment, and for that they need to be sure that they haven't overlooked a revocation declaration somewhere. So it's not enough that declarations be written somewhere durable, the client needs to be able to assemble the entire set of declarations for a given key and needs to know that it's complete. That completeness property is available on Ethereum, but I think Bitcoin script is attached to single outputs and doesn't accumulate state across transactions. So you could write declarations into the Bitcoin chain in some agreed format, but then anyone wanting the full picture needs to scan the whole chain with a full node and otherwise they can't tell whether a revocation is being withheld from them. I'm not an expert on this, but that's my current understanding.
It seems like rootstock may be different again though if it's a full EVM. But the thing is I'd never heard of rootstock before this came up, and I suspect most people outside bitcoin haven't either. Ethereum is at least something normal people may have vaguely heard of. So it's not obvious to me that swapping in rootstock or bitcoin scripts helps adoption overall, as opposed to just helping with this particular audience, which may be acting on niche preferences that don't have strong technical justifications. Don't get me wrong, though, I'd love to have this conversation with the current nostr community and the bitcoin crowd, and there may be actual technical advantages with using bitcoin that I'm not aware of.
There's been some previous threads relating to this, and also don't forget to actually try it out, otherwise it just ends up being just these abstract discussions 👇
Not an expert, but it seems like this may make delegation and revocation declarations storable and discoverable on BTC, but it may be difficult to be sure that one has retrieved all such declarations unless one runs a full node. I haven't done any in-depth analysis, but it feels like that may be the problem with BTC.
"store the revocations with a guarantee of availability"
That requires a blockchain, though? The agreement on the timestamp is kind of what a blockchain *is*.
quotingAbsolutely, for recording key delegation, revocation and invalidation declarations.
nevent1q…c3qh
I wasn't able to figure out an easy way to record these declarations on Bitcoin, but admittedly I didn't try all that hard.
The Nostr events themselves are timestamped with OTS on Bitcoin.