DaPangDun (@dapangdun) “After reviewing this article carefully, I find it quite interesting. It reminds” — TopicDigg

After reviewing this article carefully, I find it quite interesting. It reminds me of a past discussion among friends about secure BTC storage： Some argued hardware wallets are superior, recommending options such as Ledger, Jade and OneKey. Others believed a standalone iPhone works best and offers greater security. This proposal combines both approaches. It also designs a simple script that leverages pre-signed transactions to enable flexible spending. After thorough consideration, I have several suggestions regarding this scheme: ▪️For ordinary users, the solution may overemphasize the complexity of pre-signed transactions. The examples include arrangements like "monthly spending", which leads to a large volume of pre-signed transactions. In reality, most people have no need for monthly spending setups unless managing large treasury vault. Their priority lies in long-term BTC custody. Daily expenses will most likely be simplified through asset allocation, making the workflow far less complicated under such scenarios. ▪️The fund strategy needs annual reset. To prevent regular users from abandoning the solution due to excessive complexity, this step must be supported via streamlined user interactions. Naturally, this is less of an issue for large treasury management, as such treasuries inherently require ongoing strategy administration. Overall, I believe this scheme offers valuable insights, especially for individual self-custody of BTC. Of course, it faces numerous challenges, including hardware compatibility, security concerns surrounding mobile devices, and the creation of simplified workflows for pre-signing strategies. In principle, if we aim to implement more flexible strategies, it may indeed hold true that we require covenants as @notgrubles said before. #BTC# #custody# #covenants# #ANZEN#