Exactly my point, so why is it that nc50lc is saying (as I have seen some others claim as well):
You shouldn't derive the address based from that Public Key because the owner wont be able to spend it using the "P2PKH" script even if he has the private key.
Just wondering if I'm missing something here..
OP is talking about the actual P2PK transactions here, not the "
donations" to the derived address.
Of course the owner of the private key can spend those donations using P2PKH script
but not the UTXO from the P2PK transaction though that "address".
Perhaps you've missed this: "
the owner wont be able to spend it using the "P2PKH" script".
Most clients (
like Bitcoin Core) can still spend P2PK if the you have the private key since it is still standard,
but it's not a P2PKH script that can be represented into an address which is the point of this thread.