Hey Bitcoin folk, what's the argument against recursive SNARKs/STARKs as a global scaling solution that maintains maximal decentralization?
-
-
Replying to @KyleSamani
"Green and his team hoped to contribute their invention to Bitcoin because of what they deemed its benefits. But the core developers of Bitcoin weren’t interested. It was too new, would slow down the network, and make computations more expensive."http://fortune.com/2017/12/18/jp-morgan-bitcoin-zcash-wilcox/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jonathanmarcus
I believe this is the same thing they told vitalik
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KyleSamani
"Peter Todd: zk-SNARKs are a very sophisticated mathematical technique, but you’ve got to remember how novel this math is. It would not surprise me and many other cryptographers if, in the future, that math got broken, making the entire system no longer secure."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
-
Replying to @sunnya97 @KyleSamani
Seems like the moral is that novel / cutting edge cryptography is unlikely to be integrated into Bitcoin, particularly if there are potential computational or design surface / security implications.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Murad Mahmudov 🚀 Retweeted Luke Dashjr
Murad Mahmudov 🚀 added,
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.