Hi John,
Thanks for the proposal, few feedback after a first look.
> If Bitcoin and Lightning are to become widely-used, they will have to be
> adopted by casual users who want to send and receive bitcoin, but > who do
> not want to go to any effort in order to provide the infrastructure for
>
Hi Zeeman
> What we can do is to add the actuary to the contract that
> controls the funds, but with the condition that the
> actuary signature has a specific `R`.
> As we know, `R` reuse --- creating a new signature for a
> different message but the same `R` --- will leak the
> private key.
>
Maxim,
That does not sound compelling. Let's go through your points.
First you point how some wallets supporting descriptors keep vague BIP44
compatibility. There are multiple reasons for this, but first you say that the
derivation path "commits to" (i think you mean describe? that's rather wha
Any chance of a quick tldr to pique our interest by explaining how exactly
this works "and the protocol will reach consensus on whether the state
reported by the oracle is correct" in presumably a permissionless,
anonymous, decentralized fashion, and what caveats there are?
Regards,
Andrew
On Sun
