Superior off-chain anonymity?

[iamnotback]

[1714611388]

1714611388

[1714611388]

1714611388

[1714611388]

1714611388

[spartacusrex]

Like ByteBall ?

I'd say that there will be A LOT of un-pruneable data to verify the txn.

I've been working on a system that does exactly this, and the issue arises because instead of storing the UTXO (unspent) you have to store the STXO (spent), which is much MUCH more data.

I do like it, but want to come up with a version that doesn't grow to infinity..

[ttookk]

The main idea reminds me a little bit of the circles thing I am thinking about here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1689947.0

Technically, you could create a circle with only yourself in it.

Note, that the above idea is not meant to be anonymous in the strict sense (more like pseudonymous); but ideally, the holdings of a user remain unknown to the whole network. I believe this to be accomplishable.

But back to your topic:
Are wel talking about a user sending coins to themselves to split them up?
How can the network proof that the hash is actually legit?

I'm not sufficiently accomplished in technical questions to understand this stuff "on the ground level", but it intrigues me.