Taproot proposal

[pooya87]

Is there any data comparison if the transaction size after upgrade in this case could be bigger than before?

Not exactly data compression but more like data omission. In Taproot we get rid of some extra (useless) bytes:
1- Removed DER encoding used by ECDSA signatures
2- Changed how last byte in signatures known as SIGHASH_TYPE works (it can be removed to represent SIGHASH_ALL)
3- Dropped the first byte of public keys indicating y coordinate oddness/evenness
4- By using Schnorr signatures (ECSDSA) we can now easily have aggregated signatures and keys which means even with multiple participants (such as multi-sig) we still need a single signature + a single public key

The first 3 are affecting all types including the "wallets with only 1 signature" ie. the simple key path spending rules and the last one affects more complex scripts ie. script path spending rules.

[1714224449]

1714224449

[1714224449]

1714224449

[cygan]

the 1st taproot transaction ever


https://mempool.space/tx/33e794d097969002ee05d336686fc03c9e15a597c1b9827669460fac98799036

[Charles-Tim]

the 1st taproot transaction ever

The first taproot transaction after taproot activation, or the first taproot transaction with a valid signature.

This is a taproot transaction before activation:
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/b10c007c60e14f9d087e0291d4d0c7869697c6681d979c6639dbd960792b4d41

This was included in block 692261 while taproot was activate in block 709632

[pooya87]

This is a taproot transaction before activation:

Technically that's an anyone-can-spend transaction not a Taproot one. If you look closely you can see that the transaction has no witnesses (no signature). In fact one of the outputs being spent is to a fake (but valid) public key (0101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101).

[cygan]

only 54% of Bitcoin nodes (that's 33030 nodes) are currently using taproot ... in my opinion there should be more every day ... i will follow it

https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/taproot.html

[cygan]

The Beginner’s Guide to the Taproot Bitcoin Upgrade
Taproot is an upgrade to Bitcoin that aims to improve the privacy and efficiency of its network. Taproot is the first upgrade to Bitcoin in four years, since Segregated Witnesses (SegWit) went live in 2017.

The Taproot update encompasses three Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs), including BIP340 (BIP – Schnorr), BIP341 (BIP – Taproot), BIP342 (BIP – Tapscript).

https://www.kraken.com/learn/what-is-taproot

[Daltonik]

Here with binance, the user had a problem after sending btc to the address of the new bc1p format.... now he has to deal with the exchange. I also wanted to withdraw btc from binance to the bc1q address.... but when selecting it in the address book on the exchange, I received a warning: "Withdrawal to addresses starting with bc1q are not supported at the moment, please proceed if otherwise, thank you." and the address just wasn't added to the output line, I don't understand how he managed to send funds to his wallet?


https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/111440/is-it-possible-to-convert-a-taproot-address-into-a-native-segwit-address
https://twitter.com/murchandamus/status/1475120106695008260

[dkbit98]

"Withdrawal to addresses starting with bc1q are not supported at the moment, please proceed if otherwise, thank you."

No, you are reading it wrong, image you posted from Binance exchange clearly shows it's written bc1p (taproot address), and you wrote in previous post bc1q (Bech32 - native segwit).
Binance and few other exchanges does support receiving and generating bcq1 segwit address, but no exchange so far supports Taproot bc1p (some of them are only planning support).
When it comes to sending coins from from exchange to Taprot bc1p address, than we have some exchanges who are supporting that and you can track progress on this wiki page:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bech32_adoption

[Pmalek]

<Snip>

That's weird. They announced they will be supporting and upgrading their systems for Taproot at the beginning of November. What is positive from all this is that the affected user has received a refund of his coins and he has withdrawn them into his private wallet. Whether or not he managed to withdraw to a taproot address is still unclear. But if you still can't do it, I assume there is still a problem with taproot addresses.