<p><a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#user-content-BIP_comments" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 2</a> provides for comments that can be posted on BIPs on the Bitcoin.it wiki. Currently, all <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0039" rel="nofollow noreferrer">comments about BIP 39</a> are negative, which is what is summarized as &quot;unanimously discouraged for implementation&quot;. All that is needed for that summary to change is for someone to post a positive comment.</p>
<p>Now, the comments mechanism seems to be pretty much completely abandoned, making the summary potentially out of date with reality. I do think it'd be better if it was dropped for that reason, but so far, no new BIP has superseded the mechanism of BIP 2.</p>
<p>Lastly, as far as the contents of your own (apparent) opinion goes, note that opinions against BIP 39 are <em>not necessarily</em> opinions in general against all seed phase based mechanisms, and certainly not opinions in favor of hot wallets (because one can have cold wallets that are not BIP 39 based).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-20T15:56:52.863Z
2023-08-20T16:08:17.387Z
2023-08-20T16:08:17.387Z
Pieter Wuille
<p>Let's say I come new to the space and I find these three facts:</p>
<ul>
<li>Everybody advice against hot wallets unless loose change, telling to use cold storage instead.</li>
<li>Every cold storage device seems to be based on <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 39</a> mnemonics.</li>
<li><a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 39</a> is <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9" rel="nofollow noreferrer">unanimously discourage for implementation</a>.</li>
</ul>
<p>I just came into the space and found three simple facts that together seem make a rather (alarmingly?) inconsistent landscape (or what did I got wrong?). Are BIP commentators stiff condescending nitpick intelligentsia? Are cold storage vendors reckless brick-and-mortar profit-seeking CEO-wannabe grunts? Am I overthinking this or is this a confusing actual source of cognitive dissonance? If so does such cognitive dissonance scare away any newcomers?</p>
<p>Can you try to help me figure it out, I try to reason like this:</p>
<ul>
<li>Advising against hot wallets seems to make sense as a first measure against exploits.</li>
<li>If every cold storage device is based on <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 39</a> mnemonics, it sort of speaks that for some reason cold storage vendors don't care too much on BIP comments.</li>
<li>The <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9" rel="nofollow noreferrer">unanimous discourage for implementation</a> note doesn't seem to expand much on particular example posts discouraging implementation.</li>
</ul>
<p>So <strong>why is <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BIP 39</a> <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9" rel="nofollow noreferrer">unanimously discourage for implementation</a> (with or without having to look back to the mailing list, does it make sense to write a little summary here...)?</strong>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-20T15:49:52.383Z
Did you see the comment section of the bip? https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0039
Murch
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-20T19:19:14.293Z
aw, geez, it was right there
Mercedes
<mnemonic-seed><coldstorage><bip>
why is BIP 39 unanimously discouraged for implementation and what should I do about that
Mercedes
# why is BIP 39 unanimously discouraged for implementation and what should I do about that

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-08-20)

Let's say I come new to the space and I find these three facts:

* Everybody advice against hot wallets unless loose change, telling to use cold storage instead.
* Every cold storage device seems to be based on [BIP 39](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki) mnemonics.
* [BIP 39](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki) is [unanimously discourage for implementation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9).

I just came into the space and found three simple facts that together seem make a rather (alarmingly?) inconsistent landscape (or what did I got wrong?). Are BIP commentators stiff condescending nitpick intelligentsia? Are cold storage vendors reckless brick-and-mortar profit-seeking CEO-wannabe grunts? Am I overthinking this or is this a confusing actual source of cognitive dissonance? If so does such cognitive dissonance scare away any newcomers?

Can you try to help me figure it out, I try to reason like this:

* Advising against hot wallets seems to make sense as a first measure against exploits.
* If every cold storage device is based on [BIP 39](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki) mnemonics, it sort of speaks that for some reason cold storage vendors don't care too much on BIP comments.
* The [unanimous discourage for implementation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9) note doesn't seem to expand much on particular example posts discouraging implementation.

So **why is [BIP 39](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki) [unanimously discourage for implementation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blame/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#L9) (with or without having to look back to the mailing list, does it make sense to write a little summary here...)?**.

**Tags:** mnemonic-seed, coldstorage, bip

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Did you see the comment section of the bip? https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0039  
> **username_0**: aw, geez, it was right there  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2023-08-20. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

[BIP 2](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#user-content-BIP_comments) provides for comments that can be posted on BIPs on the Bitcoin.it wiki. Currently, all [comments about BIP 39](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0039) are negative, which is what is summarized as "unanimously discouraged for implementation". All that is needed for that summary to change is for someone to post a positive comment.

Now, the comments mechanism seems to be pretty much completely abandoned, making the summary potentially out of date with reality. I do think it'd be better if it was dropped for that reason, but so far, no new BIP has superseded the mechanism of BIP 2.

Lastly, as far as the contents of your own (apparent) opinion goes, note that opinions against BIP 39 are *not necessarily* opinions in general against all seed phase based mechanisms, and certainly not opinions in favor of hot wallets (because one can have cold wallets that are not BIP 39 based).


---

