How doable are bulletproofs on a technical level on Bitcoin? Would they require a hard fork by any chance? I'm aware that liquid has CTs so it might be relatively easy to implement on the main chain h...
they can be done with a UASF by adding a witness version and implementing a verifier.
the whole reason we got segwit was because people bypassed this authoritarian bullshit from core.
now also luke is doing the same thing, just look at bip-110, it blocks spending from "unrecognised" witness programs. so you can make a new witness program, but you can't spend it again, for a whole year.
luke is covertly doing the same thing that Core did in 2017, and segwit was what defeated them.
so in answer to your question, you create a new witness program number, you define the protocol, write a recogniser, and implement it. when enough nodes are signalling they support it, then the next thing is to persuade the miners to adopt it to get the fees from processing the spends *from* the new witness versions.
which is what bip-110 covertly blocks. oh it's clear, but most users don't realise what they mean. bip-110 locks the chain and doesn't deprecate taproot. taproot is the wedge they want to be left open. bip-110 doesn't deprecate taproot. taproot is the problem. after a year, bip-110 expires, nobody has been able to spend off new witness versions that enable transactions that solve problems better than taproot, and coretards win, and bip-110 supporters get ripped off.
the whole reason we got segwit was because people bypassed this authoritarian bullshit from core.
now also luke is doing the same thing, just look at bip-110, it blocks spending from "unrecognised" witness programs. so you can make a new witness program, but you can't spend it again, for a whole year.
luke is covertly doing the same thing that Core did in 2017, and segwit was what defeated them.
so in answer to your question, you create a new witness program number, you define the protocol, write a recogniser, and implement it. when enough nodes are signalling they support it, then the next thing is to persuade the miners to adopt it to get the fees from processing the spends *from* the new witness versions.
which is what bip-110 covertly blocks. oh it's clear, but most users don't realise what they mean. bip-110 locks the chain and doesn't deprecate taproot. taproot is the wedge they want to be left open. bip-110 doesn't deprecate taproot. taproot is the problem. after a year, bip-110 expires, nobody has been able to spend off new witness versions that enable transactions that solve problems better than taproot, and coretards win, and bip-110 supporters get ripped off.
1🤡1
