The Taproot adoption Failure

[casey15]

Hello Bitcointalkers

The Taproot soft fork which was introduced in November 2021 was one of the most important upgrade to Bitcoin since Segwit in 2017. This is what Introduced Schnorr Signature.

Taproot as we know offers cheaper transaction fee for users and it enhance privacy by using complex transaction firmat like multisig, lightning channels etc which are indistinguishable from simple single signature transactions.

Even with all this, you will agree with me that the adoption is rather slow. Many major exchanges still uses Segwit for default withdrawals sometime even Legacy.

I figured that the  integration of Taproot requires these exchanges and custodian to completely rework their underlying wallet infrastructure .. and sometimes it could be that they are scare of changing the system that has been proven and runs for years.
I also feel like until a large majority of wallet users support Taproot, then using it as a default sending option may be delayed further.

These are just my assumption on why the adoption has been slow over the years.  Is there any major actions that can push the adoption faster,??
 or is it even a necessity for the adoption to take place since Segwit is still very much functional and does well.??

[Charles-Tim]

Even with all this, you will agree with me that the adoption is rather slow. Many major exchanges still uses Segwit for default withdrawals sometime even Legacy.

Many major exchanges are using legacy and some exchanges are using nested segwit. Nested segwit is not segwit.

Most wallets make segwit version 0 the default, the reason most people are using it.
Segwit version 0 still have lower fee but if it is about consolidation, taproot (segwit version 1) has the lowest fee as the input is getting more.

For transactions with the same input and output or with more output, segwit version 0 has the lowest fee.

The reason most wallets have segwit version 0 as default.

Taproot as we know offers cheaper transaction fee for users and it enhance privacy by using complex transaction firmat like multisig, lightning channels etc which are indistinguishable from simple single signature transactions.

I have not seen this on any wallet despite that it is possible, I do not think it has been implemented.

[Agbamoni]

The Taproot soft fork which was introduced in November 2021 was one of the most important upgrade to Bitcoin since Segwit in 2017. This is what Introduced Schnorr Signature.

The Schnorr Signature was under the first BIP proposal, which was the BIP340. With time, more BIPs' proposal was made, updating each feature for acceptance. From BIP340 (Schnorr signature) to BIP341 (major taproot) and BIP342 (the tapscript).

Taproot as we know offers cheaper transaction fee for users and it enhance privacy by using complex transaction firmat like multisig, lightning channels etc which are indistinguishable from simple single signature transactions.

Don't believe everything the internet tells you until it is proven. Taproot offers low fees, but taproot transactions can still be traced easily by a true Bitcoiner.

Read about the BIPs proposal from 340 to 342, and you will understand it better - https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0340.mediawiki?utm_

[Donneski]

From what I’ve noticed, the slow pace with Taproot mostly comes down to how much backend work exchanges would need to redo. It’s really not as simple as "enable Taproot”. They will have to adjust parts of their key-management systems, signing setups and a bunch of security routines they’ve relied on for years. Most big platforms avoid touching those unless there’s a strong reason and since SegWit already works smoothly for most people, there isn’t much pressure on them to rush anything.

I honestly think Taproot adoption will pick up naturally once more wallets, libraries and multisig tools make Taproot support easier by default.

[stwenhao]

Taproot as we know offers cheaper transaction fee for users

It depends. Spending from Taproot may be cheaper, but sending to Taproot is more expensive.

Is there any major actions that can push the adoption faster,??

Yes, for example the default address type is still Segwit, even in Bitcoin Core 30.0.

Code:

createwallet ""
{
  "name": ""
}
getnewaddress
bc1q...

is it even a necessity for the adoption to take place since Segwit is still very much functional and does well.??

Well, from the total on-chain data consumption, spent-by-keys Taproot addresses take less space, because 160-bit hashes are not needed. However, because 160-bit hashes are smaller, sending to Taproot is more expensive, so if someone is sending coins to a lot of recipients, then there is less incentive to adopt Taproot, as long as RIPEMD-160 is safe.