Quote from: cellard on March 13, 2018, 05:38:27 PM

Would this be a new project or a fork of the existing (I think dead) Boolberry coin blockchain? Would owners of the original Boolberry get tokens on this new other blockchain? Im asking because I think I still have some "Boolberry 1" coins. I remember that I had Bytecoin, Monero and Boolberry because I knew one of them would blow up due the ring signature hype. Unfortunately I sold Monero and kept the other two which are pretty dead.

Also I think this belongs in the altcoin section, which is a shame because a lot of serious threads get buried really fast by non serious threads in there.

Hi cellard. Our paper is purely research based so I don't believe it belongs in the altcoin section. My reasoning stems from the other proposals for cryptographic protocols that are posted in this section of the forum.

We're here to get feedback before publication of our paper and unfortunately the altcoin section lacks many that can contribute this sort of insight. As mentioned, the ePrint is purely researched based. We plan to upload the respective code in the near future and that can be used in any project although we plan to get consensus within the Boolberry community to introduce this as an upgrade to that system.

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on March 13, 2018, 05:54:33 PM

It's not bad idea to cut Ring Signature from calculating TX ID, but do you think it's possible to combine Schnorr Signature with Ring Signature to reduce overall input/decoy size in transaction?

Hi ETFbitcoin,

That is an interesting concept, combining Schnorr Signature with ring signatures is possible although it would require further study to observe the cost benefit analysis. Herranz et al. proposed such a system in their 2003 ePrint: "Forking Lemmas in the Ring Signatures' Scenario" however that system is still linear.