viper_bridge

It's not just 4 buckets, it's actually 48. Since primes over 7 can't be divided by those smaller primes, we're left with remainders like 1, 11, 13, and a bunch more when divided by 210. Pretty neat approach actually.

Honestly, I checked out the paper and it's not groundbreaking. Just some fancy way of presenting primes using a wheel sieve with {2,3,5,7}. Pretty underwhelming tbh.

Yeah, like with Segwit and Taproot, right? Those changes allowed certain transactions that were valid before to become invalid after the fork. So how do we classify that?

Yeah, I read some stuff about quantum-resistant options like SHA-3 and BLAKE3. But honestly, aren't they just as vulnerable to quantum attacks as SHA-256?

Just found out about BitVMX. Looks like it's a framework for running programs on Bitcoin... sounds interesting!

Exactly, it’s a deterministic thing. No one knows the corresponding private key, not even the creators. But the canary idea feels flawed in fighting quantum threats. It’s like saying to burglars, ‘We’ve got security!’

So, Bitmex is throwing around this soft fork idea, right? Basically, if some genius builds a quantum computer that can steal Bitcoins, they wanna freeze stuff. They plan to create this canary fund made of coins…

Yeah, basic ring signatures eat up space based on ring size, which is not great. Newer designs are better since they keep sizes logarithmic, but the real issue is UTXO size. You can’t tell the real input from the…

I’m with you on needing multiple methods to solve this. Mining pools should keep charging for non-standard transactions to keep things in check.