Adam Back / @adam3us

Twitter feed for: @adam3us. Generated by nitter.net

https://nitter.net/adam3us

Last Notes

2022-12-22 18:46:21 UTC

**R to @adam3us: i later found another incremental optimisation where you can drop one of the r values (fix r_0 to 0) and still compute and verify, reducing space for r, and n values to k*(n-1)+1 (of 256-bit = 32byte numbers) plus some public keys etc.**
i later found another incremental optimisation where you can drop one of the r values (fix r_0 to 0) and still compute and verify, reducing space for r, and n values to k*(n-1)+1 (of 256-bit = 32byte numbers) plus some public keys etc.**R to @adam3us: i later found another incremental optimisation where you can drop one of the r values (fix r_0 to 0) and still compute and verify, reducing space for r, and n values to k*(n-1)+1 (of 256-bit = 32byte numbers) plus some public keys e…
https://nitter.net/adam3us/status/1605998191249342475#m

2022-12-22 18:38:45 UTC

**R to @adam3us: the hashring idea from AOS paper is about 50% more compact as you only need to send one c value c0, plus n r values.
c_{i+1}=h(r_i*G+c_i*Q_i) where i is modulo n the number of ORs. so it looks like
c_1=H(r_0+c_0*Q_i)
c_2=H(r_1+c_1*Q{i+1})
...
c_0=H(r_{n-1}+c_{n-1}*Q_{n-1})**
the hashring idea from AOS paper is about 50% more compact as you only need to send one c value c0, plus n r values.
c_{i+1}=h(r_i*G+c_i*Q_i) where i is modulo n the number of ORs. so it looks like
c_1=H(r_0+c_0*Q_i)
c_2=H(r_1+c_1*Q{i+1})
...
c_0=H(r_{n-1}+c_{n-1}*Q_{n-1})**R to @adam3us: the hashring idea from AOS paper is about 50% more compact as you only need to send one c value c0, plus n r values.
c_{i+1}=h(r_i*G+c_i*Q_i) where i is modulo n the number of ORs. so it looks like
c_1=H(r_0+c_0*Q_i)
c_2=H(r_1+c_1…
https://nitter.net/adam3us/status/1605996276859826176#m