All for innovation, but remember that 99% are 'please buy my token' schemes, that rely on self promotion
This is a good group for discussing the details of legitimate innovation. Try and work out what about ZK proofs would be useful
I asked Ruben about this a while back
"their claim that you only need 22kb is simply not possible
you'd have a hash of a UTXO set, and you would know that that UTXO is valid, but you wouldn't be able to prove inclusion to anyone
so it fails as a blockchain
my article explains this"
This smells like shitcoinery! What gives?
I try and post things that I think this community will find interesting, even if it's contrary to a "pro-Bitcoin" narrative.
I don't feel I have a deep understanding of Mina or the underlying mathematics so I was kind of hoping someone more knowledgeable than myself could weigh in on why it's good/bad.
In particular, Mina is trying to solve the "large blockchain" issue via zero knowledge proofs (or SNARKS?) (I think). Does this approach have a fundamental flaw? If so, why? If not why not? Could the ideas be incorporated into Bitcoin? Are other people looking into it?
Part of my understanding of the fundamentals of Bitcoin are having an idea of it's limitations and why other solutions can/can't be used to overcome them.
TLDR; posted here to provoke interesting discussion, not to shill for altcoins.
I had a feeling that was the reason. Sorry I just had to troll you a little lol.