LOL I have published multiple research articles and have been quoted in other scientific journals before – but this is the first of its kind.
<3
Discussion
SMART DEVELOPER 🫡
Congrats! Most of us are just pseudonymous, minus the “smart”. 😂
🥳
Lol look at the first bullet point of my review, glad Ricardo kept it though since it led to this note
#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=475x252&blurhash=i5G*%3F_%7Ep00-s00jO00RZ004%2Ct3--WCxtobV%7CV%5BRWJ0tLj_WCj_obogRkog9pt3t8WCogj%3Djdaeaj0JxoxuWCxtRks%3BRljw&x=8f630bf12acd9ff2bbe5fdd1050f6b6dede40f7b6011d3b9b384c4b60fffce5f
Nice!! Ha those are the two guys who wrote a paper on how Satoshi had made a mistake in the White Paper in the calculations for the double spend race by an attacker!
Wow, that's coolest scientific citation I have ever seen
pseudonymity >> anonymity
Link to paper?
Here you go: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.12783
Why was the paper withdrawn?
I don't know, looks like only the revision was withdrawn. Possibly because it's in a peer-review process? No idea!
🤙
If you have a PDF link would love to read
Would have been so cool if it said " Dr. Calle". 🥸
lol
💪
I’ll bite - what’s a scientific journal?
ROFL! Lets just take the mint's word for it whether they have reserves by checking the mint's published list of token hashes. What the?
I don't get what the paper is trying to achieve with the r' = r + n trick but I'm trying
There is also a major mistake in the paper in that it assumes only the list of blind signatures is required for a proof of reserver but that completely ignores the fact that ecash can be spent from one person to another, adding entries in these lists that don't inflate the supply....
At least the mint can present the unsealed secret as evidence a token is invalidated, preventing someone from claiming the mint isn't presenting hashes of all of its tokens.
I think 3.2 and 3.3 is trying to implement a system similar to an auditable election ballot. Anyone that holds a token can verify the mint is recording his token and then add up the total balance of published tokens, and anyonr that holds an unaccounted-for token can provide proof of lack of reserve. This could work if channel balances on the lightning node are pubically verifiable, which they are not.