Replying to Avatar Thekid.999

I didn't read your whole note. I just read the first 2 sentences. I'm sure he's saying that because he lost his crowd. Bro, didn't he say he sold all his Bitcoin for etf, bro? He's lost his crowd. So he needs to say something. So people can talk about him.
Avatar
Cyph3rp9nk 1mo ago 💬 2

He hasn't told any lies; this debate has been going on for years and has always been known.

In fact, Peter Wuille was heavily criticized for this.

The thing is, taproot was sold as a gateway to improvements to protect against quantum computing, and since then no progress has been made, while Signal and Simplex have gotten their act together.

By the way, I shouldn't have responded to you because you started out being disrespectful, you idiot.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
epsql 1mo ago

I had no idea that taproot was presented, among other things, as a potential improvement with respect to QC threats. How could this have been given the exposed pubkey? Am I missing something either in my understanding of how taproot works or more generally?

Also what debate are you referring to? I'd like to know more, thanks

03
Anony 1mo ago 💬 2

Me too. I was surprised to read Taproot exposes public keys again. Where's this debate?

Avatar
Cyph3rp9nk 1mo ago

It has always been this way. Search for "quantum taproot" on Twitter and you will see comments from over two years ago regarding this matter.

03
Anony 1mo ago

Nah, I meant: I thought we had transitioned to using key-hashes for initial commitments, but with taproot we're back to immediately exposing public keys.