They are unconditionally valid. Coins from future Segwit versions are spendable now. Future soft-forks can say for example: "only coins meeting these conditions can be spent". So, today, you can just spend them like bc1pfeessrawgf. However, if you include any witness stack push, then it will also be valid. It may be non-standard, but valid. And also, that's why every soft-fork has some "confiscatory surface", because maybe, someone, somewhere, used addresses like that, for some unknown purpose. However, this is why standardness rules are there: to assume, that users made only standard transactions, and to allow for the future soft-forks to invalidate "unconditional coin spends" into "you need to satisfy these rules" spends. Then, old nodes assume these coins are valid, and new nodes enforce new restrictions on top of that. I wonder, if I should include some regtest example, or if you want to take your time, and figure it out. Edit: Spammers will get there soon anyway, so let's go: As you can see, spending it is non-standard, if you try to send it to your regtest node. However, let's include things directly into a block: See? It is valid. You don't have to sign anything, you can just include that UTXO, and move it unconditionally. Of course, if you include any witness data, for example nearly-4-MB-data-push, then it will be also valid as well. But I am not a spammer, so I will leave it as an exercise for the reader. Real spammers will get there anyway, and as long as miners like MARA still block many non-standard transactions, it will still take some effort. But in general, I think it is inevitable, so I can post examples like that, because moving these coins without any witness stack can help to clear some UTXOs anyway, if someone won't attach any witness into that.
They are unconditionally valid. Coins from future Segwit versions are spendable now. Future soft-forks can say for example: "only coins meeting these conditions can be spent". So, today, you can just spend them like bc1pfeessrawgf. However, if you include any witness stack push, then it will also be valid. It may be non-standard, but valid. And also, that's why every soft-fork has some "confiscatory surface", because maybe, someone, somewhere, used addresses like that, for some unknown purpose. However, this is why standardness rules are there: to assume, that users made only standard transactions, and to allow for the future soft-forks to invalidate "unconditional coin spends" into "you need to satisfy these rules" spends. Then, old nodes assume these coins are valid, and new nodes enforce new restrictions on top of that. I wonder, if I should include some regtest example, or if you want to take your time, and figure it out. Edit: Spammers will get there soon anyway, so let's go: As you can see, spending it is non-standard, if you try to send it to your regtest node. However, let's include things directly into a block: See? It is valid. You don't have to sign anything, you can just include that UTXO, and move it unconditionally. Of course, if you include any witness data, for example nearly-4-MB-data-push, then it will be also valid as well. But I am not a spammer, so I will leave it as an exercise for the reader. Real spammers will get there anyway, and as long as miners like MARA still block many non-standard transactions, it will still take some effort. But in general, I think it is inevitable, so I can post examples like that, because moving these coins without any witness stack can help to clear some UTXOs anyway, if someone won't attach any witness into that.

They are unconditionally valid. Coins from future Segwit versions are spendable now. Future soft-forks can say for example: "only coins meeting these conditions can be spent". So, today, you can just spend them like bc1pfeessrawgf. However, if you include any witness stack push, then it will also be valid. It may be non-standard, but valid. And also, that's why every soft-fork has some "confiscatory surface", because maybe, someone, somewhere, used addresses like that, for some unknown purpose. However, this is why standardness rules are there: to assume, that users made only standard transactions, and to allow for the future soft-forks to invalidate "unconditional coin spends" into "you need to satisfy these rules" spends. Then, old nodes assume these coins are valid, and new nodes enforce new restrictions on top of that. I wonder, if I should include some regtest example, or if you want to take your time, and figure it out. Edit: Spammers will get there soon anyway, so let's go: As you can see, spending it is non-standard, if you try to send it to your regtest node. However, let's include things directly into a block: See? It is valid. You don't have to sign anything, you can just include that UTXO, and move it unconditionally. Of course, if you include any witness data, for example nearly-4-MB-data-push, then it will be also valid as well. But I am not a spammer, so I will leave it as an exercise for the reader. Real spammers will get there anyway, and as long as miners like MARA still block many non-standard transactions, it will still take some effort. But in general, I think it is inevitable, so I can post examples like that, because moving these coins without any witness stack can help to clear some UTXOs anyway, if someone won't attach any witness into that.

They are unconditionally valid. Coins from future Segwit versions are spendable now. Future soft-forks can say for example: "only coins meeting these conditions can be spent". So, today, you can just spend them like bc1pfeessrawgf. However, if you include any witness stack push, then it will also be valid. It may be non-standard, but valid. And also, that's why every soft-fork has some "confiscatory surface", because maybe, someone, somewhere, used addresses like that, for some unknown purpose. However, this is why standardness rules are there: to assume, that users made only standard transactions, and to allow for the future soft-forks to invalidate "unconditional coin spends" into "you need to satisfy these rules" spends. Then, old nodes assume these coins are valid, and new nodes enforce new restrictions on top of that. I wonder, if I should include some regtest example, or if you want to take your time, and figure it out. Edit: Spammers will get there soon anyway, so let's go: As you can see, spending it is non-standard, if you try to send it to your regtest node. However, let's include things directly into a block: See? It is valid. You don't have to sign anything, you can just include that UTXO, and move it unconditionally. Of course, if you include any witness data, for example nearly-4-MB-data-push, then it will be also valid as well. But I am not a spammer, so I will leave it as an exercise for the reader. Real spammers will get there anyway, and as long as miners like MARA still block many non-standard transactions, it will still take some effort. But in general, I think it is inevitable, so I can post examples like that, because moving these coins without any witness stack can help to clear some UTXOs anyway, if someone won't attach any witness into that.