i wouldn't want to give it any publicity. let's hide it under the covers since it is quite an embarassment to bitcoin that such a thing could be misused
Validation of Taproot Scripts as it stands right now is garbage.
not the first time
and some devs did consider it, and adore the utility abuse of allowing it.
the thing is though by letting certain people try to hide it and not talk about it. it just ends up with devs getting away with it and repeating it, rather than fixing it
bitcoin used to be a proper open gated community allowing anyone to get involved where by the mass consent of the network instructed the ruleset. thats not the way anymore
bitcoin used to have many node implementations of different brands on the same network where the devs of each would promote their own proposals..
and after review and seeing the benefits other devs wanted it too.. thats not the way anymore
bitcoin used to be independently reviewed/scrutinised and critiqued where anyone can report bugs.. thats not the way anymore
now even core devs (the sole reference client) is closing off its gates with new moderation policy and contributor ranking systems. heck even the top half dozen devs do not propose code and ask the rest to review and "ack" it. instead there are many instances they just self merge their own code. unreviewed
so silence is not the solution
normal people did not need complex scripts and other cludge. it was businesses that wanted segwit/taproot.. as gateway features to use on alt networks.. and they sponsored devs to get it implemented before a certain date. which required pushing it in by any means possible
note all the date limits amd mandated dates.. and instead of listening to consensus from november 2016-may2017 of only 45% they pushed outside of the 45% consensus vote to force it in by faking a 100% unnatural flag
the pushed it soo fast that once activated they didnt finish the job.
the devs that made segwit didnt strengthen the rules again after their bypass
at the GUI level they didnt even make segwits able to sign a message
there are other things. where the main devs do not trust segwit (sipa and luke jr still use legacy)
(even coinbase which is the vault for grayscale GBTC uses legacy)
and it was the DCG group (NYA) that sponsored and pushed for segwit.
then more businesses wanted taproot. yep normal people again dont need the complex scripts.
these features of segwit and taproot are for organisations on alt networks.
and as we know taproot is not a finished complete feature. its another flawed feature
these things were sponsored implementations. they were not wide community requested features
and the devs paid to get them to be activated into the network did not care about bitcoins security/utility. they just took the money
and thats the big shame on bitcoin
the softening of consensus in 2017 and 2022 are not about 'backward compatibility'. its about 'forward ease of change'
old nots do not fully verify data they have no rules for. so these new stuff are not made to be verified by older nodes. so its not backward compatible at all..
its just a softening and weakening of consensus to let new things in unchecked. which is bad security