Looking forward to some quality Schnorr FUD from Jbear and crew.
I don't know why you'd think that. I don't believe I have previously espoused an opinion on Schnorr sigs.
You basically said Schnorr signatures would do nothing to alleviate the scaling issue. That would qualify as an opinion.
Hmm. I guess you know more about my past postings than do I. Link?
Schnorr can obviously reduce the size of txs that have multiple elements. I wouldn't say that is 'nothing'. If this be shown to be a reversal of a previously held opinion, then so be it.
Of course, my final opinion would be driven by an analysis of not merely the
benefits of Schnorr, but also its
costs.
edit: Oh - I see you've added the link. Thank you. I shall quote:
Currently it would take over 30 years to send each person on earth a single Bitcoin transaction. Think about that.
Lightning does nothing to alleviate that.
Segwit does nothing to alleviate that.
Schnorr sigs does nothing to alleviate that.
True enough. If you wish to send every person on earth a single Bitcoin tx (e.g., perhaps to open an LN channel), it will take on the order of three decades. And Schnorr indeed does nothing to alleviate that. It is a true statement, and it is not identical to "Schnorr signatures would do nothing to alleviate the scaling issue".
Your assertion is shown to be false.
And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that!