Author: Eric Voskuil 2021-03-04 07:46:30
Published on: 2021-03-04T07:46:30+00:00
In an email exchange, "The Australian" questioned the understanding of Bitcoin by an unknown recipient, claiming that a signature is a mathematical proof that the person who signed is the same person who created the script that was paid to and that there is no other way for anyone to "look at" potential fraud on the chain. Taproot is not a proposed change to this design, and thus "The Australian" is unsure of what exactly the recipient is objecting to. "The Australian" requests that if there are any flaws in the existing or proposed mathematics that would enable fraudulent creation or transfer of bitcoin, they should be spelled out. Another email from Felipe Micaroni Lalli via bitcoin-dev asks "The Australian" to stop making noise and confirms that fungibility is a desirable property.
Updated on: 2023-06-14T18:22:27.054415+00:00