00:00:12 But we already have linear verification for the range proofs so... apparently that's fine. 00:04:12 Tbc, COPZ's DLEq proof dates to mid-November and is a range proof (so BP++) and a few misc ops in a 512-bit field. While I'd have to double check its failure properties (it can randomly fail)... 00:06:02 I think with a salt, it can be made failure-less. While that salt probably reveals bias, I imagine we could randomly select an 8-byte salt? It'd statistically never end up fail and since it's randomly selected, we wouldn't know if it was the first or the second attempt? 00:12:53 To be clear on the tower, as I'm not sure how distributed it's been, I have an impl (no opts) available here: https://github.com/kayabaNerve/serai/tree/tony/crypto/bulletproof25519/ My work on a circuit was: https://github.com/kayabaNerve/serai/blob/tony/crypto/tony-proof/src/lib.rs 00:12:53 It uses bellman's stub prover/verifier, intended for testing, yet does impl blinding properly. It also does a hash in-circuit. I had yet to make a merkle of it nor build an arbitrary BP impl around bulletproof25519 so this could actually be done. The current lib is too slow to even tests with BPs. I ported my impl of Monero range proofs to it and I believe it takes a couple minutes just to do those .-. 04:03:48 Hi, Everybody 04:06:34 I wanted to say that file size for the block chain is increasing, and it has already become large enough so it should be divided into multiple files. 04:06:55 Is there any plans for that 04:06:57 ? 04:07:36 in the future? 04:20:30 * for that ? 04:49:24 this is a better question for #monero since this isn't research related, no there are no plans for this 19:06:12 Any comments about this idea?: https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/100hddh/skepticism_sunday_january_01_2023/j2j4w56/ 19:06:59 I have a hunch it's not feasible, but it sound intriguing. 19:23:11 not possible