[for merits] How will the introduction of Schnorr signatures affect Bitcoin?

[Jet Cash]

Here is a chance for those of you who are interested in improving your knowledge of Bitcoin to pick up a few merits.

The patent on Schnorr signatures expired a while ago, and it is likely that the technology will be incorporated into a few Bitcoin projects. Schnorr offers a chance to improve privacy, and this will become important as the price of Bitcoin increases. It also provides a reduction in transaction size when a single user makes a payment from multiple sources.

I hope that some of our newer members will research Schnorr signatures, and post some interesting opinions and questions about the future impact on Bitcoin. I will be checking for plagiarism, so please ensure that your post are based on your own original ideas and understanding of the concept.

[1715352849]

1715352849

[1715352849]

1715352849

[1715352849]

1715352849

[1715352849]

1715352849

[1715352849]

1715352849

[@oweljayr]

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.

[Jet Cash]

>..<

I did have some trouble understanding your post, and it seemed to be positive towards Schnorr signatures, but your final conclusion seemed to be negative, and I didn't understand the justification for that. I think you should work on your English, and we would be pleased to help you in the Fit to Talk English project.

Your other big no-no came from your post history. You made a full quote of a large post by JackG immediately after his post. That is extremely annoying, and it is one of the things that triggers me to place members on ignore without even reading their posts.

[AdolfinWolf]

Means after schnorr starts, the effect is much less significant and overfilled in 1mb block.

So on my opinion i'm disaggre to schnorr on bitcoin.

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

I guess this could the the best coming feat...<-snip->

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)

[@oweljayr]

Means after schnorr starts, the effect is much less significant and overfilled in 1mb block.

So on my opinion i'm disaggre to schnorr on bitcoin.

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

I guess this could the the best coming feat...<-snip->

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.. (Epay.info et al)

Sir,  This is just my opinion regarding the subject, it's just an example of how it will make classified information more secure.  Means it will lessen the worries of being interfered by hackers.  If it was not the right interpretation of what I understood about Schnorr Signature, then my mistake and I apologize for giving wrong information.

[Jet Cash]

Schnorr signatures have absolutely nothing to do with wire tapping, or i must have missed something.

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.

[clear cookies]

>..<

I did have some trouble understanding your post, and it seemed to be positive towards Schnorr signatures, but your final conclusion seemed to be negative

I apologize for my english, give me a chance to edit my post.
As i said it's hard for me to type the perfect grammar, but i'm trying to do my best
to understand my post clearly. Again i'm really sorry, i will edit my post soon.
For now it's better for me to study the rigth english and grammar before i edit my post.
I promise that i will not dissapoint you when i edit my post again. Thanks

[Steamtyme]

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.   

[virendarnagpal]

Sharing this type of challenges are definitely welcome steps.  There may be many members here on the forum who must be having knowledge about how to complete such projects.  So this news will be important for such technical persons and positively they will earn financial; also in the form of merits.

Good chance

[mightwalker]

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.

[figmentofmyass]

Schnorr signatures have absolutely nothing to do with wire tapping, or i must have missed something.

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.

i'm not sure how. as i understand it, schnorr signatures simply incentivize coinjoin-type transactions (they'll become cheaper).

anyway, wire tapping implies they're already analyzing your internet traffic and probably hitting up your ISP and third party services for your logs. coinjoin adds some obfuscation, but some transactions can be revealing on their face due to input/output amounts. and it has problems that would be magnified by said traffic analysis. for example, they are prone to sybil attacks: if they know where you participate in coinjoins, they can act as the other participants to decipher your transactions. plus, the server-based coinjoin model is problematic because it entrusts whoever runs the server with your data (like electrum servers)---more honeypot fears. and IMO it probably won't save you if they're already linking your wallet outputs to you with a high probability (see here). and if you're tapped, you better be encrypting outgoing traffic---but then you better hope your VPN isn't a government honeypot. yes i'm paranoid!

if you think you're getting tapped, you should be thinking bigger than schnorr signatures......

[nakamura12]

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.

[r1s2g3]

Schnorr Signature allow the users to sign all the input with one signature if they are part of the same output. Signing the message requires space so the space will be save by using schnorr signatures and more transactions can be accommodated  in the block.

[Alone055]

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.

[r1s2g3]

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.

Your understanding is differing from my understanding, I do not think bitcoin have network issues , it is always block capacity issue (in short storage space issue.). Schnorr Signature will not make transaction faster as they are govern by block mining speed only (unless you counter that it will accommodate more transaction in block so it is faster but ultimately it is saving space only.)

The real benefit I guess is saving the transaction fees because we are paying transaction fees on the basis of bytes consumed by transaction.

[squatter]

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.

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.