I have been under the impression that Bitcoin has smart contract functionality, and that this is what allows things like Lightning Network to exist. My understanding was that Taproot (or more specifically, Tapscript) enhanced Bitcoins smart contract feature set making even more things possible.
Then, I'm watching this recent video by Mr. Antonopoulos about BIP119, and out of left field he surprises me and says…
Now the argument here is we should do this because we it will allow bitcoin to do smart contracts and you've probably heard my opinion on that many times before. If you want to do smart contracts go to Ethereum. That's what it's made for.
I don't believe that bitcoin is suitable for doing smart contracts but more importantly I don't believe that bitcoin should be suitable for doing smart contracts. It involves a trade-off and that trade-off is for that extra flexibility you introduce potential vectors for exploits for vulnerabilities.
Is he saying that Bitcoin does not already have smart contracts? Or is is saying that he doesn't approve of the smart contract features that Bitcoin already has? Or something else?
I get that Ethereum's smart contract features allow people to do some crazy (maybe even reckless) stuff that isn't possible on Bitcoin, but I'm completely confused by Mr. Antonopoulos's statement about smart contracts on Bitcoin. It sounds like a very "no smart contracts on Bitcoin what-so-ever" position, and I feel like there's got to be some nuance here that I'm missing or totally out of the loop on.