I guess this could the the best coming feature on how to get the most secure way of keeping your wealth such as physical wealth or even more with digital currencies or cryptocurrencies.  Hackers will be having trouble some cracking the PIN codes or passwords unlike the way they had dominate the cyber world of information, information like bank accounts, social media and other personal accounts.  Our virtual wallets would most likely will be safer and more secure from any form of inconvenience such as fraud and unknown transactions.  So long Hackers!! Most likely it is against wire tapping for any information to be safe from anyone or anybody who could interfere with regards to communication for their own benefits.  That is how I understand what's that is all about.

How can you dislike a feature that literally has 0 downsides..? AFAIK, the only minor annoyance is that it might require a softfork.

What/where did you read that? Schnorr signatures have absolutely nothing to do with wire tapping, or i must have missed something.

A lot of faucets & exchanges pay their userbase from multiple "sources"/inputs.
If fees start to rise again, Schnorr signatures might prove to be extremely useful, and decrease fees for such companies significantly. I remember that at one point that withdraw fees on poloniex were really absurd, (0.005BTC?). If only we had schnorr signatures back then, it could've possibly been a lot less/ never spiraled up to that point.

It might even keep the entire faucet industry to live yet another day, as i know that fees like the ones we had in December really crippled them, to the point where multiple faucet networks simply shut down and ran with customer funds, as it was simply unprofitable and thus impossible for them to keep operating... (Epay.info et al)

I seem to remember reading an article which suggested that the privacy possibilities with Schnorr signatures may help in the event of government wire tapping. It was a bit of a secondary comment in the article though.

You do seem to bring up some of the more interesting topics. I'm guessing I read the same medium article anyone else who had never heard of this did.

The standout for me is you would no longer need to consolidate inputs during low fee periods. The Schnorr signature wouldn't care how many inputs are now being used for the output transaction, it would essentially combine them all at the time the transaction is posted. I may be understanding it wrong, but that would be beneficial to me as a small miner or anyone with a lot of smaller inputs; they would be more accesible during high fee periods.   

This topic is really surprising to me because this is the first time I heard a strange concept called "Schnorr signatures". So I decide to spend an hour to read and understand it.
As I researched in some sources, this idea was given since 2012-2013, just until recently, the team can make it a significant breakthrough.
To make Schnorr signatures can be applied in Bitcoin Blockchain, SegWit is the first important step to change the code, the mission of this task is moving the signature's data to another part of a block. It makes Schnorr can perform by upgrade backward compatible software (we call it soft-fork).
Basically, when we send bitcoin to someone, each part of the transaction has an independent signature. On the other hand, with Schnorr signature, all data will be carried out only one time.
So which advantages will Schorr signatures bring to the Bitcoin network?
- Decrease the number of signatures means to increase the number of transaction's data accord with each block.
- By combining signatures, the transaction is more difficult to detect where it is from, as a result, the privacy will be improved.
- Anti-spam: It happens when a person or a group makes a lot of small transactions, the network is blocked. Although Lightning network are doing it well, with the help of this Schnorr signatures concept, stability will be improved greatly.

I think Schnorr signatures will affect bitcoin if it is implemented. Implementing schnorr signatures will combat spam attacks, reduce the use of storage and bandwith by 25%. Schnorr signatures will solve two bitcoin problems and it's about scalability and the other one is called spam attacks. Schnorr signatures will improved scalability and increased privacy.

Transaction costs and times have always been a reason that tensed the users of Bitcoin. If Schnorr signature can free up the space in the network, causing faster transactions and less costs for transfers, then it would probably bring a very big change to the usage of Bitcoin. Its implementation would lead to a 25 to 30% boost to the network, according to its developers, and that would definitely change the face of transactions in compared to today's.

In terms of linear scaling, Schnorr signatures can help a bit. I've seen estimates as high as 40% reduction in blockchain data, but the truth is that we have no idea what future adoption will look like, or how long it might take. It was the same with Segwit; adoption is voluntary and therefore slow.

Whether scalability improves by 10% or 40%, it's still only a linear improvement. If the network is faced with exponential growth, then the improvement from Schnorr will be a drop in the bucket. What we really need is off-chain solutions that provide exponential scale -- like the Lightning Network. The incentivized privacy benefits of Schnorr are a lot more exciting than the potential scaling benefits.