Quote from: death_wish on Today at 03:51:30 AM

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on Today at 02:52:42 AM

A to my railing against ZCash, you are right, though I had heard about them moving to the non trusted new tech I have not followed closely to see that they had. That's a plus. But there are many minuses still for me. And with life being how it currently is for me ([...personal details...]) I have not had time to respond to much here.

[...]

Have anonymously donated to both Bitcoin Development as well as another project along the way. Both my own money and my time in the form of community contributions and merged pull requests on both projects.

My sympathies for your family situation. (Snipped from the quote, just in case it’s too much information.) I hope that your people will be ok.

Based on your statements in this post, I edited another recent post of mine with an apology for and retraction of some aspersions cast on your character.

I can guess that you refer to That Other Privacy Coin. The one with a community fund. I am familiar with both projects, I weigh pros and cons of each—you’re right, it is off-topic for WO in itself. I only wanted to discuss technology I have been yearning to see in Bitcoin for about the past nine years. It got into a tangent because, hey, it is salutary to remind people that Core development gets paid for somehow.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on Today at 02:52:42 AM

A to my railing against ZCash, you are right, though I had heard about them moving to the non trusted new tech I have not followed closely to see that they had. That's a plus. But there are many minuses still for me.
[...]
That said, I have several complaints about that project. Do not agree with the Dev tax argument, though I am sympathetic.

Many pluses and minuses for me, too. I insinuated somewhere, perhaps a bit too subtly, that they could have better manged the “dev tax” money; this type of issue has sometimes caused controversy and alienation in the Zcash community. I was speaking only to the principle of the matter, by way of pointing out that Bitcoiners need to support Core. Beyond that, the only part of my Zcash criticisms relevant to WO is that I am very worried by their announced plans to switch to POS, which seem to me a matter of smooth-talking VC-types putting the hard-sell on naïve crypto-nerds who are sad about their coin’s price performance.

POS is eating the world. Old-school POW alts first: It is strategic to isolate Bitcoin as a big consumer of energy and to set more POS-switch precedents, as anti-POW propaganda ramps up. In addition to my fears as a longtime Zcasher, I see this ultimately as an attack on Bitcoin—the ultimate target.

I do try to keep on-topic here. Anything that I’ve said about Zcash is ancillary to discussion of Bitcoin, and not reasonably avoidable for that. If I wanted to praise or critique Zcash in itself, that would be a different post—and it would come off much differently. By the way, if I wanted to discuss That Other Privacy Coin, I would discuss its decentralization and its community strengths (and RandomX) in addition to critiquing its privacy technology. What I really want is to have it all in one place: In Bitcoin.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on Today at 02:52:42 AM

I agree NFT's might end up useful tech for just the thing you are mentioning (titles, other single certificate type uses) but I think the best implementation would be a federated sidechain. I think cities, counties, states and the federal government, title companies etc. could be members of the sidechain, and others could subscribe. It would be hash-anchored to bitcoin, but maintained by the federation.

Ultimately, I think that a better trustless, or trust-minimized Bitcoin sidechain implementation is needed to support numerous use cases: Scaling, zero-knowledge proof privacy (the original Zerocoin and Zerocash ideas were for BTC on Bitcoin sidechains!), smart contracts/on-chain programmability (wtf am I doing on POS chains? need the features), the non-scam parts of defi, non-idiotic NFTs, etc.

I am very strictly against spamming the Bitcoin mainnet (e.g., check post history re so-called “burner addresses”). But I am cautious about discussing sidechains: I know that many ideas have undesirable security risks.

I am aware of RSK, but an EthVM clone is not exactly my cup of tea. I do like that it is merge-mined with Bitcoin. I am very much in favour of merge-mining sidechains (or altcoins) with Bitcoin.

^^^ The discussion of sidechains incited a brainstorm. Of something else that could be done with ZKP on mainnet; another non-privacy application thereof, in addition to the idea I had in the Development forum a few weeks ago. Sat here a long time thinking about it... Need to post this; to be continued somewhere/sometime.

Thanks for the sympathies and retractions of curses, though i do not mind. Similarly i apologize for being a jerkass back there... My recent stress has damaged a lot of my filters.

I am a reluctant Maxi. I think there is room for other blockchain projects to flourish (not 10,000 that's for sure), though I also think we will most likely gravitate to one central chain, and I think I know what it will be. Ha. And I have a very sort of strict ethos for what I do, and do not like to see in a project, and can get overly passionate and sometimes heated about things. ZCash puts a particular burr in my saddle. Also, I should not speak as I did about the Winklevosses, though I also see them as just another couple shitcoin casino owners. But there is a continuum, and they are more on the Kraken side of that continuum for me than the Coinbase/FTX side.

Plus, I can take the heat... you and I can go back and forth about alts somewhere else or in PMs if you want to, though my time is not very abundant right now.