Good morning Erik and Jeremy,
> The "for" arithmetic here is largely to mean that this cleverness allows an
> implementation of `OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK`, using arithmetic operation `OP_ADD`.
>
> To my mind this cleverness is more of an argument against ever enabling
> `OP_ADD` and friends, LOL.
>
Good morning Erik,
> i may be ignorant here but i have a question:
>
> Given that schnorr signatures now allow signers to perform complex arithmetic
> signing operations out-of-band using their own communications techniques,
> couldn't you just perform the publishing and accumulation of these si
i may be ignorant here but i have a question:
Given that schnorr signatures now allow signers to perform complex
arithmetic signing operations out-of-band using their own communications
techniques, couldn't you just perform the publishing and accumulation of
these signature components without usin
Yep -- sorry for the confusing notation but seems like you got it. C++
templates have this issue too btw :)
One cool thing is that if you have op_add for arbitrary width integers or
op_cat you can also make a quantum proof signature by signing the signature
made with checksig with the lamport.
Th
Good morning Jeremy,
> Dear Bitcoin Devs,
>
> It recently occurred to me that it's possible to do a lamport signature in
> script for arithmetic values by using a binary expanded representation. There
> are some applications that might benefit from this and I don't recall seeing
> it discussed
Dear Bitcoin Devs,
It recently occurred to me that it's possible to do a lamport signature in
script for arithmetic values by using a binary expanded representation.
There are some applications that might benefit from this and I don't recall
seeing it discussed elsewhere, but would be happy for a
