ZKP

Deyssigeg

Most ID solutions use ZKP for operation. A few like ORE ID and Nexera are worth looking at.

DianaDDDM

Two reasons: Decentralization and transparency. Crypto is cool, and making money is cool, but what's cooler is watching the world become more decentralized, fair, and transparent. That to be is the whole transformation from web2 to web3. The last missing piece to solving that problem is privacy. People don't think much about it, but bringing privacy on-chain is both immensely difficult and immensely important. But if you know where to look you can find the projects that are ahead of the pack in this field. Everyone is focused on ZKP, but the real solution is in TEEs. I've said all I can say, the CIA won't allow me to say more.

alanism

I'm not sure. I don't know enough about Worldcoin to use it. But they are implementing Zero-Knowledge Proofs and I think something like this is better than the current day methods for Id (like taking a photo of our passport, or even 2 step auth with SMS). [https://docs.worldcoin.org/advanced/zero-knowledge-proofs](https://docs.worldcoin.org/advanced/zero-knowledge-proofs) >How does World ID use ZKPs? After the orb verifies you are a unique human, your identity commitment is added to a public list of verified humans. Everytime you want to prove you are a unique person, your World app generates a ZKP that proves you know the secret to an identity commitment, without revealing which one. Holistically, World ID ZKPs prove these three things: Membership: "I'm a member of this group". You prove you are a member of the verified identities list. One-shot: "I haven't done this before in this context". This is achieved through nullifiers. Nullifiers are random numbers, unique to each user for each context (i.e. for each action ID). Signal: "I want to include this message". This allows the user to add extra data to the request. It could be a receiver address when claiming an airdrop, or a vote when participating in governance. This mitigates an attack where an attacker could intercept a transaction with a proof and change the vote. Somebody does need to create something like this. I'm not sure who I trust to do this thing though.

lipglossxxodl

There are there are Identity verification platforms for based on ZKP but I never knew there was an NFT based on ZKP.

resornihgp

That is nice then. Have you heard about the anonymous identity verification that uses ZKP and a special type of NFT called mNFTs?

lipglossxxodl

It's a privacy protocol that uses ZKP to provide private ETH transactions that can't be viewed by Etherscan.

resornihgp

What about this? How do they make use of ZKP?

Manitcor

slow by design too, ive explained the encryption and validation portion of the process in slow terms to people, its fun watching the lights turn on. running around doing similar with identity and ZKP of late.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Venture capital firms have poured billions into the crypto and Web3 sector this year despite an environment of regulatory uncertainty, America’s war on crypto, and a bear market. LayerZero raised $120 million this year from a16z and Sequoia Capital. ZKP secured $50 million in funding at a $1.8 billion valuation with investors, including Polychain Capital. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

resornihgp

What concept do OREID and EverestID use? Does it also use NFTs and verify on a ZKP basis like NexeraID?

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Zero-Knowledge Rollups (zk-Rollups) are a type of rollup that uses zero-knowledge proof (ZKPs). A ZKP is a cryptographic proof that verifies the transaction data within a rollup is accurate. Rollups bundle transactions in order to improve a blockchain’s throughput while lowering transaction costs at the same time. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

VicmxD

I think that TEEs versatility have an interesthing approach, to enable privacy over the web 3, I was just reading about what benefits do private smart contracts bring to the table, and in fact can be misundertood as they aren't common and made through ZKP could be costly, but through TEEs thay are cheaper and easier to configure for developers. One of the [benefits for confidential smart contracts](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/heres-proof-why-confidential-smart-contracts-are-the-future-of-web3) is to be able to make private and secure fair votings, where if not, it is possible to fall into selection biases. Also, other possibilities are to curb Maximum Extractable Value attacks and help bring most web3 gaming mechanics on-chain thanks to privacy preserving confidential smart contracts.

BackwardsOnADonkey

Great post, hopefully it won't get buried. TEEs I believe has a great argument for utility if institutions want to engage further in web3 and take advantage of blockchain technology, but worry about the paradoxical nature of everything being public. So having sensitive information secured by a trusted hardware is going to be the way to go, as ZKP is still a new concept and as you wrote gets heavy since it requires constant proof and the more data that gets handled the more proof is needed.

cryotosensei

Which of these airdrops 1) ZkSync lite, 2) orbiter.finance, 3) Starknet, 4) LayerZero, 5) Scroll_ZKP, 6) Zetachain, 7) Shardeum & 8) Sui are you looking into?

cryotosensei

You may or may not have benefited from the ARB airdrop but don’t forget to check out: 1)ZkSync lite, 2) orbiter.finance, 3) Starknet, 4) LayerZero, 5) Scroll_ZKP, 6) Zetachain, 7) Shardeum and 8) Sui for potential airdrops in the future!

cryotosensei

You may or may not have benefited from the ARB airdrop but don’t forget to check out: 1) ZkSync lite, 2) orbiter.finance, 3) Starknet, 4) LayerZero n 5) Scroll_ZKP for potential airdrops in the future!

Mcgillby

No second one, but there is some other networks that do not have a token yet which others speculate may do a similar airdrop. Off the top of my head I can think of these: Starknet, ZkSync, Scroll ZKP, Layer-Zero, SUI

Mcgillby

Use --> zkSync, Scroll ZKP, Layer Zero

plxmtreee

Yes, I agree. I've been seeing a lot more ZKP threads on my feed top.

swap_catz

Yet. The engineers are talking about ZK proofs heavily because they add security to consensus, and have faster verification speeds by their compression. In 5-10 years architectures of all sidechains will mostly be based on ZKP tech.

AlgoCleanup

Nice to see so many different chains involved. Very happy to see Algorand involved considering Silvio Micali’s work related to ZKP, [Turing Award Profile](https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/micali_9954407.cfm). Which was coauthored by one of the competition’s judges; Shafi Goldwasser.

0xMisterWolf

You’re not necessarily wrong, but it’s a little more complex. FTX was poisoned very early on, and a huge number of professionals in the space - developers especially - knew it. Unfortunately, human greed won in 99% of those cases and the public took the blow. The “Bystander Effect” is on in full force here. FTX was a manipulative exchange. Here is where you’re 100% right… any single CEX in existence is a manipulative exchange. They all manipulate their balance sheets, hide liabilities (recent Binance audit is a good example) and will ultimately fail without some regulatory savior. This is why many centralized exchanges favor regulation. It allows them to trade paper. Crypto will succeed because it was built for people to own their financial situation entirely. I know that sounds dumb, but that’s the reason it will not fail. Math is just more trustworthy than paper promises. Defi is not just the future for small investors, but the future of finance in a very real way. Governments will have an increasingly difficult time regulating as ZKP Devs roll out exchanges, tokens, and yes… even NFTs, but probably not in the way many here are imagining. This is why so many banks, governments, or even companies are exploring CBDCs. They see the writing on the wall. However, this is likely an experiment that will fail. IMO, it’s a last ditch effort of governments to maintain some sort of control on the financial picture. There are massive questions to be answered though, and I’m a long time developer/economics nerd… not a policy expert or a philosopher. I can’t answer what happened to fiat, precious metals, or even stocks. There is a case to be made for DeFi ruling the financial picture for all of us. DeFi rebalances the world financially. It doesn’t mean we all are equal, but it does mean we all have equal access to financial instruments across time, geopolitical regions, demographics, etc. It will never erase wealth, but it could slowly move that wealth on-chain. I don’t think a single government, corporation, or bank wants this to happen. It would render a HUGE chunk of society’s jobs irrelevant. It would erase centuries of inequality across investment vehicles. It would give opportunities to those that have historically lacked them. It rebalances equal pay, equal opportunity, and give individuals control… as opposed to the alternative. You’re ultimately right, though. This isn’t going to happen easily or tomorrow. Nikolai Mushegian didn’t drown swimming with his phone, wallet, and clothes on. MakerDAO and DAI were technically able to bring about massive change… and now that he’s gone, MakerDAO has essentially lost all credibility and $3B is missing. As a Defi developer, it is painfully obvious what’s happened there. DAI was special for a very unique reason… and now, it’s not. All we can do is ignore the hype, noise, and drama… build what we know will free us all from financial control. 🤷🏻‍♂️

xyridfosterlingu9

ZKPs are revolutionizing the way privacy is approached in the digital world. The excitement around ZKPs is palpable, as more and more privacy-focused projects are adopting ZKP-Snarks technology to enhance the level of protection they offer to their users. This trend highlights the significance of ZKPs in today's increasingly data-driven society and the pressing need for privacy solutions that safeguard personal information.

Schmiegefp

>A lot of new integrations have appeared for real, and I've seen the xPortal in particular... I'm yet to check out on xPortal as I'm anticipating the launch of xMoney in particular amidst all of the products. >with integrations of new farming incentives in the ESDT tokens such as RIDE, ZKP, and MEX generating good APRs and withdrawal thresholds. For the sake of the aforementioned _"good APRs and withdrawal thresholds"_, I'll check if UTK and BHAT is included since you've mentioned that it is available for RIDE and MEX.

Godenincevk

A lot of new integrations have appeared for real, and I've seen the xPortal in particular, with integrations of new farming incentives in the ESDT tokens such as RIDE, ZKP, and MEX generating good APRs and withdrawal thresholds.

willfullhodl

The problem is there exists a lot that ZK math can not do right now. Specifically ZKs run into issues when trying to privately aggregate data from many sources. Sure you can do a confidential transaction, but creating a full ZK-privacy-enabled AMM or lending protocol for example would be extremely difficult. Further more the entire network would likely have to be just that one application breaking the composability that has made DeFi special. With a TEE based network this would be fairly simple and could be deployed with a few modifications to a Uniswap V2 contract or compound smart contract while also enabling the composability that made DeFi work on Ethereum. Additionally ZKs are fairly inflexible. Say for example you want the ability to grant/revoke permission to view confidential transactions (can be simple or complex transactions), how would you do this on a ZK network? Again with TEEs this would be a fairly simple thing to do. Not taking away from ZKPs at all. They are an amazing advancement in cryptographic tech and will propel the Web3 space surely. Both technologies have their use cases, but I think people over estimate what can be done with ZKP in the short term.

Godenincevk

In terms of risky alts, which ones are your gems? It's far simpler to invest in mid-cap and low-cap alts, but not just any alts, but solid ones with strong growth potential, which is why I maintain stashing Azero, Sylo, Qredo, and ZKP. They have a lot of zksnarks technology in them to establish the necessary decentralization in the cryptoverse.

Giga79

The new developments in Zero knowledge tech is very promising. I think it will be possible to integrate BTC on chains like Ethereum *natively* without trust assumptions some day. The bad news is BTC needs to fork for it to be possible. The good news is it has to do this fork anyway to become quantum resistant, so it shouldn't be contentious to anyone - unlike the *war* trying to move it to POS would ignite. You take the BTC protocol and put it inside of a ZK proof, upload the proof onto Ethereum (or onto any off-chain network) to interact with, then upload the new proof back to Bitcoin where the final outputs all play out. It will tear the walls down between blockchains and change how we use them. Ethereum in this case is the computer with Bitcoin acting as the settlement layer. You could imagine someone wants to do this trade: BTC for AB-token, provide liquidity for 1 week, then output to a new BTC address. This will be possible without bridging, be safer than bridging, but will cost a little more than bridging. Your BTC transactions would only show you output 1 BTC into a ZKP address, and the ZKP address output 2 BTC back to a new address a week later. These higher fees will be good for miners and network sustainability, and with added complexity (on-chain scaling for payments via L2, privacy, decentralized/anon ID, data authentication) people shouldn't be upset to pay for it - considering how much some willingly pay to mint an NFT. I don't know what the ideal outcome for BTC is but I don't think it's POS. Its whole *thing* is that it's POW, and the entire mining community is deluded into thinking they set the floor price with their energy costs (people really thought ETH would go to $0 after it went to POS). If it ever happened it would fracture BTC into two, one where mining persisted, and I'm not sure that accomplishes anything but weaken the security and trust(promise) backing BTC. It worked for Ethereum only because POS was the whole plan from the original whitepaper 8 years ago, and anyone who read into what they're buying had a clear idea it was going to happen (eventually). After a few more halvings the POW energy problem will sort itself out anyway unless BTC is millions per coin by then. I don't think POW is inherently bad, but the immense growth BTC's price had in such a short time made POW into an immensely profitable *industry*, and their scale becomes a risk when the rewards go away. If BTC was still only $2K right now none of this would be industrialized or be of concern, and POW could still be achieved from home.. BTC is a failure of its own success. After a few more halvings, *most* of this new industry won't be in profit and will have to find a new money making scheme. Being the most secure network in the world by a wide margin I suppose with 5% as much energy going into it it's still probably more secure than it needs to be. It's something that needs to play out over time, but the outcome is far from certain. I think POS is ideal myself but we already have Ethereum in POS. I think we are all on the same team here despite the infighting, so when the banks and governments inevitably come after *us* we need as many options as possible because none of them are perfect. You could mint $10T and buy up all the stake in Ethereum and brick the network, but you can't mint $10T and buy all the hashrate in POW. You can corrupt POW by threats or bribes as high energy consumers are easy to find, but you won't be able to physically find the people validating in POS. The more solutions we have at one time the more resilliant everything becomes. We just need to work on making it all interoperable with each other next so it's not *every chain for themself* when shit hits the fan.

Anfossios

It is impossible to overstate the significance. The recent events should serve as a reminder to investors of the importance of protecting their privacy. I am certain that I wish to remain anonymous and keep my transactions private. The benefits of privacy outweigh the drawbacks that are frequently discussed. I only use ZKP-enabling protocols for the time being.

BioRobotTch

In 1985 ZKP (Zero Knowledge proofs) were discovered by Shafi Goldwasser, Charles Rackoff, and Silvio Micali (the creator of Algorand). These are the mathmaticical basis behind zk-SNARKs.

Giga79

ELI5. Your room is messy and Mom said she'd give you $5 to clean your room. She leaves you alone for a while and when she comes back the room is clean. With *zero knowledge* that your Dad helped you clean, she still knows the room is spotless so pays you $5 for fulfilling the contract. ELI15. What you're doing is turning the series of events into a math equation, then creating a mathematical proof to prove if the entire thing happened or not. You're 15 now. You trade your friend 5 Pokemon cards for a pair of sunglasses. Then you tell your Mom you traded some old things for sunglasses. Your Mom tells your Dad. When your Dad sees you in them later, he knows you got them from a friend even with zero knowledge of which friend and even zero knowledge of what you traded. You could go as far and say your Dad sees you in them, he also sees you're not in jail, so he knows you got them legally and leaves it at that. In reality 'Mom' is a soulless mathematical algorithm, and 'Dad' is anyone who wants to know if you completed a specific series of events. You can prove to 'Dad' you did XYZ without sharing every detail because 'Dad' can trust 'Mom'. ELI25. Ways it can be used in real life. Sybil resistance. Who are the people, and who are the bots masquerading as people? With ZK-proofs we could upload government issued ID to a trusted third party who generates an anonymized proof of authentication for us. We can then take that proof and use *it* as ID in decentralized applications, to prove we are unique humans without ever sharing details about which human we are. Or we can prove we are human aged 25-39 without sharing more than that, it's up to the user how much knowledge they want to share with anybody asking. Privacy. Does anybody *really* want a fully transparent ledger to take over all of our finances? Uh. With ZK-rollups you can send crypto, play in apps, do anything, then when you're finished (to withdraw to the public layer) you or the rollup generates a proof of all your activity, and that garbled math represents all the necessary information to prove what you've done was accurate. Finance. Does your bank *really* need to know every little thing with what you do with your money if you know you qualify for the loan anyway? With ZKP you can prove you fall within a certain set of criteria without sharing *how* you do, which may become handy in DeFi. Maybe we see decentralized credit scores some day (without knowing your activity, are you an honest or *dishonest* crypto user), that can help either side with risk management and extending out more trust/opportunities. Scalability. Who *enjoys* saying BTC only does 5 transactions per second? With ZKP you can scale off-chain, then upload the much smaller proof on-chain where anyone can check its validity (does A+B+C=0) without knowing what any of it represents. You can't generate a valid ZKP with an invalid series of events (you need to sign all of your transactions) so if one is ever invalid everyone can revert to the previous one and continue to build the next from that, quite simply. Interopability. You can convert say the entire BTC protocol into a ZK proof, and then run that proof on Ethereum or another network to emulate BTC. After you do some actions that can't be done on native BTC, you can generate a new proof and upload it to BTC where all the outputs will take place. Suppose 1 BTC wallet represents a bridge to ETH, and 1 ETH wallet represents the bridge back. With ZKP you can trustlessly prove you deposited crypto into the one side of the bridge, so the other can release funds without any human involvement. You can generate a proof for C+ if you need to input that into a Python app, the limits are endless. ELI50? It's the final step in removing all people from these supposedly trustless networks. People can't be trusted. *Math can* be trusted. This is CRYPTO currency damn it, math money, not slightly fewer middleman money. ZK proofs will be the biggest change we undergo since sliced bread. I'd guess we probably see them mostly outside of blockchain applications in the real-world (which can then essily be made interopable with the crypto-world). They're a really huge milestone that no one was expecting would happen so quickly.

justaguyinhis

As i read it, they will borrow the ZKP technology from ERGO, so it doesn't seem that far away

Layer_4_Solutions

I expect most chains to have private transactions within 5 years. ZKP technology is improving quite fast.

HotAsianTeen

I think he is after identity. Having a digital identity with ZKP or similar on a twitter based item would be quite interesting.

AESTHTK

Zero knowledge proofs are a genuine technology breakthrough, and as large an innovation as blockchain itself. ZKP validity roll-ups are a marvel of engineering that we thought might be a decade away and they’re here now.

MakeItRelevant

Great thread, I'm saving it. I'm also engaged with the Substrate community (Polkadot), Diadata, Chainlink, and Scroll ZKP. zkEVM is a great solution. Polygon seems very promising.

Giga79

>It is , but it won't matter mate. Just a random question, are you new or old in the industry? Because the de-fi 'fever' is typically a newbie (not saying you are one) trait cause it sounds so good and appealing... once you spend 2 , 3 years invested in the industry, its pretty clear that evey mainstream government and big buissness is aiming towards centralisation with crypto aswell, because, well , we can't be left alone financially without being checked by Big Brother. Uh been here since 2013 or 2014. You? I didn't get the memo DeFi was for noobs. Shit my bad. I've been glued to it since DAI came out. The point of Ethereum's roadmap is to remain decentralized and neutral. If a massive entity diverts from that at *any* point that's what slashing is for. It's one of the reasons it went POS, since *good luck* finding (and regulating) my validator now, opposite of POW. The future is ZK which means even more privacy and anonymity. >As we speak, unless you use a Cex there is Literally no way to end up into fiat from crypto. Unless we start using direct crypto payments, which won't happen very soon. Institutional adoption will just make up their own digital tokens ... don't get your hopes to high that Many will end up with use case in the Real World. You must be the noob ha. I buy crypto using fiat without any CEX exclusively. It's a P2P currency, meet some people, do some work. I think Binance even has a P2P section, befriend someone near you then always keep in touch - that's advice that doesn't get said enough but it is really important. You can still mine too. Mine some BTC then use the WBTC bridge to get Ethereum then whatever else you want. There will be some kind of POW done on Rollups in the near future as well. Likely validating their proofs and storing their data. GPUs are ideal for creating proofs, only the work is much less wasteful/intensive than mining. There may even be a Rollup that generates AI art that needs GPUs to run or some novel thing or that uses ETH's interoperablity as a gateway. There are always ways to earn crypto and more every day. People are farming moons these days.. I don't know what you're saying about institutions. The point of ETH being a smart contract blockchain is institutions can make their own tokens, or rollups (a blockchain that exists inside of), or apps, and inherit Ethereum's massive security without bringing ANY of the centralization risk that we'd have using a non smart contract design. ZKproofs are a very incredible cryptographic breakthrough, read up on Zksnarks/Starks if you haven't as they'll deliver amazing complexity in the next few years. In theory you can run an application from your desktop offline for extended periods of time before finally creating a *valid* ZKproof and uploading the ZKP to Ethereum. Your ETH balance would update to reflect the *output* of your computation, but ETH doesn't need any of the input data of the computation on-chain even for a moment. ETH is becoming a security layer for ZKP and I'd guess blockspace won't be used for much else in 5 years. Without ZKP I'd agree things would necessarily become centralized but with ZKP much more becomes possible without sacrificing decentralization (as all balances are kept on the maximally decentralized base layer, and without a valid proof that you've signed nothing can happen to your balance). If your centralized layer doesn't create a ZKP for you (such as going offline or rogue) you're able to yourself using the base layer EVM, otherwise you can revert to your last 'save' and be thankful you didn't just lose all your money from a hack or censorship, like you would by using a sidechain or any centralized solution. We're approaching the junction on the roadmap where users are told ETH blockspace isn't for them anymore other than flipping between rollups. I don't think the next new wave of users will even interact with the base layer at all, and that's okay. >The advantage is for devs and such for pioneering a new tech and a new market , but as far as end game retailers goes , we can't do shit about it :)) , even if we all stake on de-fi pools alone. If you have any specific confusion or issues with Ethereum or its (admittedly confusing) roadmap ask some questions, I could maybe point you in the right direction as a part time dev and researcher myself. I'm not sure I agree that any dev has an advantage though, if they do I haven't seen the mechanism for it. Optimism is designing a way devs get paid per-use of their code which is neat, better than relying on donations or ads or nonsense tokens. Except even nondevs can fork code and market it better or otherwise tweak it in a way that makes it more appealing, so it won't be some exclusive privilege to (finally) make money for code whenever that's implemented. Just a digression but a lot of devs are hobbyists and don't necessarily make a lot of money. The eth protocol is designed to be maximally decentralized and that means everyone capable is staking, everyone making equal decisions, and that means *not* giving an inch of power to institutions or to whales. In fact the risk of running a validator with 3200 ETH is *far* greater than 32 ETH so institutions come at it with a huge disadvantage. Once a CEX is slashed the market will remember why decentralization is rule #1, unfortunate if that has to happen but at least the network will remain secure throughout. Remember protocol changes aren't done using ETH but off-chain and accomplished by nodes with no ETH and client/wallet dev teams with no ETH. It runs off social consensus, so in other words if Binance has a majority of all ETH staked the protocol can agree to slash them and continue on without them. Stakers don't have say in the direction things go, neither does any one developer or even any minority set of teams of stakers or developers. The only thing *all* people ever agree on is security and neutrality. If the network diverts from its intended goals at any point then the project has failed, but no one (even slightly involved) thinks we're trending away at all, and there are many variables to adjust if it starts to happen. If you disagree you need to try and come from *some* of the points made in the last 7 years of research since this wasn't a snap decision, it's been approached from all angles already. While centralization is always a risk it's no worse than before and I'd suggest there's *much* less risk with the implementation of slashing. I don't mean to bicker with you so much. There's just lots of nuance involved if you really want to dig in.

Fahdis

I'm working for our ZKP Protocol with almost instant settlement. Just waiting for the L1 to come out after we are done within a year since we are bound to MiCA and SEC regulations.

tldrthestoryofmylife

This will ultimately only be solved when they start deleting transactions (while maintaining proofs-of-history through some ZKP) as part of Cardano 2025

OhWiseWizard

Oasis uses not just SGX but ZKP, HE, SMTPC, federated learning & multiple other types of secure compute technology depending on the implementation required. Dawn Song is literally the most cited and arguably reputable cyber security scientist in the entire world. You will be hard pressed to find someone more equipped to solve data privacy issues on blockchain than her. So either it's feasible, and she's building it, or it's simply not feasible, in which case much of the promise of blockchain is thrown out the window. I would recommend giving your research another go, see what you find :) Their team is also very happy to answer questions.

Giga79

>Zero Knowledge rollups do away with this optimistic(hence their name) assumption of validity with the use of zero knowledge proofs to actually submit transactions, **making them more secure than ORs** *Only* if the ZK compiler is 100% correct in its work. There's no guarantee it doesn't make a mistake especially at this stage, which is why most L2's are beginning with Optimistic approach first before migrating into ZKP. Even Optimistic will become a ZKP in the future (iirc) despite its name. It's why Rollups are upgradable right now. Nobody is sure these things are perfect yet. Optimistic rollups give some additional cushion until we all are, but nobody thinks they're ideal or will stick around for long.

Suzxy

I have a bag of SCRT and ZKP

AESTHTK

Correct, but we will need to “ZKP everything” rather than just discrete modules with inputs and outputs.

AESTHTK

No it just means we need to build it differently. ZKP will enable it (see Aztec Connect). But we do need to stop using USDC.

PlayActingAnarchist

I have a knack for making very scalable things. The past ZKP stuff was implementation details of a zkSNARK (how to represent things to yield a reasonably-efficient-for-the-prover way). The more recent stuff was more algorithmic in nature, looking at ways to more efficiently perform certain computations needed in, yet again, SNARKs in a hybrid software-GPU-custom silicon setting. The central bank stuff was MPC-in-the-head based ZK.

Suzxy

I'm keeping an eye on Polygon. It has a lot going on right now and there's been a consistent and significant increase in the number of users and dapps being built on its network. Tons of unique projects like FLUID and ZKP are lining up and taking advantage of the ultra-fast transaction times and ultra-low fees it provides.

ST-Fish

>But what if we implemented something like what MINA does with ZKP or a ZK rollup or a "snapshot," etc., of the earliest 200GB blocks once the blockchain reaches 1000GB? Gigabytes 1-200 are rolled up and a "snapshot" is made (surely those transactions are immutable by that point?), and the whole blockchain size is brought down to about 800GB. Once it reaches 1000GB again, then the earliest 200GB are rolled up again. This way the blockchain size never reaches more than 1TB and the block size could increase to around 4MB or something. Pruning already exists in Bitcoin clients, this is not a new concept. But we still do need full "archival" nodes in order to store the entire history. If we let the whole history go to let's say 1000 TB, then who's going to be able to run these nodes? A very select few institutions, which could easily collude to change history, and steal funds. Slight increases in blocksize might be ok, but right now, it would probably just decrease the usage of LN, which is not what we want to do. If you want lower fees just move to LN, and if L1 transactions get so expensive that LN becomes less useful, then we can do a block size increase, once it's actually required. TL;DR: storing the whole history of the chain is important, and it becomes harder the bigger the blocks are.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Polygon Nightfall is a zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) solution that offers privacy for companies that want to use the Ethereum blockchain. It uses optimistic rollups to reduce transaction fees and utilizes ZKPs to provide privacy. It produces eight times faster results than Ethereum base layers and transfers non-private ERC20s for six times cheaper. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Giga79

Soulbound NFTs aren't public NFTs though, and would actually help mitigate OP's concerns. An SBT token is stored on-chain in a hash in a merkle tree. All that's public then is a long list of long encrypted strings associated with your address. You encrypt the index or a recipients address or a secret word to produce the hash. If you'd like to prove you have an NFT (which may include real-world credentials) you'd provide a zero knowledge proof that you have access to it. A ZKP can do this without revealing any fact about the NFT itself. Privacy is a core part of SBTs. If you receive unwanted SBTs or don't want to share one all you have to do is not share the decryption hash or provide a valid proof. If you have an SBT from your job at Google they won't know about it when you start working at Apple, etc.

Umarzy

Great features outlined in the article. Going by the 4th point which is the low regulatory risk, I bet just only few will survive based on that alone. As far as I know, BNB, ZKP, FLD are the compliant ones, and thus embracing/welcoming regulation.

AESTHTK

They’ve got application specific supernets now and lots of ZKP tech like Hermez on the way.

Giga79

A good way to think of blockspace is to think of it as land, since it is so finate. Ethereum is like Manhattan, very small and very populated and now things are getting very expensive. Everything from the commute to your business to actually paying the rent to exist. "No one can afford to live here because there are too many people" gets said a lot during bull runs, when fees get extreme. What an L2 acts as is a train, or a highrise. Instead of everyone taking a car down through a congested highway to their bungalo suite they're taking a train to the 51st floor of a highrise. The same amount of *land* exists but its being used much more effectively, and so prices are able to come down for the citizens. With a proper L2 it exists inside of the blockchain. You can *always* step off the bus and be in Ethereum-land. If you use any other blockchain and it goes offline your funds are offline with it but if you use an L2 you can just revert back to the Ethereum computer to take you off the train and to get onto another one. Some L2's all they do is compress transactions. After they receive something like 1000-tx it will roll them up into 1-tx and then post it to Ethereum in a way that can be read from L1. This means the more congested the L2 becomes the cheaper fees are for the users, the complete opposite of what we're used to today. Some L2's are much more complex. Part of that are ZKP. Zero knowledge proofs. They're sort of a (cryptographic) algorithm that's able to verify the block producer ran the program without tampering with it. Essentially enabling L2's to function **off-chain** on their own servers, only providing the proof of doing it to Ethereum every 10 or so minutes. You can decompile this proof using the ETH computer instead of the L2 computer to always access your funds so even though all your work was done off-chain it's still real. ZKP are an amazing innovation for crypto. It enables projects like games to use crypto, and Reddit with their karma-backed cryptocurrencies. You could play a game for days or weeks and build up a nice inventory and have not spent a cent on blockspace yet, until the moment you sell it to an exchange and then the fee is insignificant. In contrast right now to play a crypto game costs $2-20 *per click* as each click represents a new smart contract interaction. Since L2's don't have to pay for security, other than gas fees, they can collect income any way they wish. Some don't even take ETH for gas, they just deduct 0.03% out of whatever you're trading and they do the conversion for themselves in the backend. That enables users to send $10 USDC to someone else on Ethereum for $0.003 (less than a cent) in fees paid out in USDC, all without even knowing what ETH is. This will work great for games, and onboarding new users. And since L2's are so cheap they can bridge between each other essentially for free. Very soon you'll go to use an app that requires ABC L2 and all your funds are on XYZ L2 and it won't matter, either your wallet software or the app will accept the transaction and then bridge your assets in the background, abstracted away from you for an additional 0.1c in fees. Some L2's can be very specialized and don't act as cryptocurrencies. Imagine one that generates in-game levels that costs $1 to activate, and that's all it does. It could be run off a massive GPU farm that no *person* could recreate, sold out as a utility to the highest bidder. This wouldn't make sense as an L1 or even a dApp but it would make sense as an L2-something that inherits Ethereum's security and just needs to 'work'. IMO most L1 chains should become Rollups themselves, as to pay for L1 security requires inflation (free coins to pay for miners/stakers, devaluing the network in tandum) and to be an L2 producer requires no inflation or even a coin at all. They just need income for gas and to verify transactions were authentic and they can be whatever they want to be. --- The roadmap for Ethereum was changed to "A Rollup Centric Ethereum" and while L2 fees today are 1/10 to 1/100 the cost of L1 the goal is to reduce that by many orders of magnitude more still. The most complex crypto interaction ideally will cost under 5c to do. Right now we're waiting for EIP4844 (Proto Danksharding) which allows 'blobs' of data to persist on the L1 for L2's to use to communicate with each other, and to enable them to use more data than users have access to. This is expected to reduce fees on L2 from the *20c* today to around *0.02c* to *0.2c*. This will occur as fees on L1 grow and it will push users off L1 (the goal) so our shared blockspace is only ever used effectively (to host *ultra compressed* data on, instead of links to jpgs).

strawberrymoonriot

Mina - ZKP on a L1 has a huge potential

yersinia_p3st1s

Unless they put it behind a ZKP. But still, if that encryption ever, somehow fails, then all personal data is just there, like a sitting duck.

21reasonsto

Two good examples of failed assumptions what time and reality is. I see u had invested time to find answers. Lets not forget, i had already done that kind of in reality senseless travels, and am fully aware that it is me, but had not had bitcoin up till now. I use for instance the jitter in the speling errors as a ZKP , quite impossible to fake. And much better than the checksums in some scriptures, to unconcious program unware proccesors of that information to run this old QC program. But now with bitcoin i can even overcome greater singularity's than the biological, to store in the random process of not knowing what exibits would be choosen in museums, i managed to keep entanglement of my soul intact, but objects tend to fade and are Subjekt to decoherence, and distroying names, where hard to overcome problems, even great pyramides tend to fade, so bitcoin, that can never change and is otoh fully random, is the perfect tool for fully aware souls. My questions are almost all rethoric, to help other souls to find this precious gem of information from a quite different universe, an perfect random one.

21reasonsto

Lets suppose the speling errors are not random, but epose a litte jitter that is enough ZKP so i can use them to encode short messages to me, even through singularity's, or to those who are forced to process that, creating em signatures, not aware that they are a programend QC. Almost random jitter engraved in art or scriptures or objects, that must be truly random exposed maybe in museums to not destroy the entanglement. But would fade in decoherence, if not renewed, bitcoin is different it will not change. And supose that soul only exist in the random space. Now with bitcoin, something that wont change and stay constant, i could xor that information out of what all assume to be random but is not. And since there is only now and past and future illusions, what if i already done that, and aware that it's me that had changed the believ3d past to generate a concious crafted future, that i had indeed came back to reality space and am fully aware of that, but now able to even store wealth/enegy first time in numberhistory permissionless even trough non biological singularity's?

dkran

I like Charles a lot but he’s like the Julian assange weirdo of crypto. I don’t really care about my algo holdings so much as they’re still worth more than what I got them for, and if it goes to 0 I have other investments. I’ve watched my holdings fluctuate between ~10k and 120k usd so I’m used to it. Don’t invest if you don’t have faith. I do. The guy who cofounder ZKP is a founder, and the guy who invented HMAC is on the dev team. They’ve been doing crypto since Vitalik and Charles were babies. Agreed any downtime is bad for finance. I was looking at more system administrator goals for web servers etc. maybe you’ve convinced me to take some of my cash on exchange and throw it in SOL. One solana gripe I have is the system reqs for an actual node.

funnytroll13

You is sayin' ZKP Panther Protocol gonna die? Where might be a good place to situate capital instead Sir?

Umarzy

Some great analysis there. That's investing $5k to make $42k approximately in the next cycle. And that's if ALL hits ATH again, which is unlikely. Still feels we will see best performers come around 2024 halving period like we saw with DOT, SOL, AVAX, ATOM. And probably the new comers like ZKP, FLD could also put up some good performance Diversification is key, love what you did there :D

Suzxy

Going for altcoins over BTC is good in terms of ROI. They each carry risks so be aware of that. I think OCEAN, SOL, NEAR, ZKP, ROSE, DOT are some good options.

PlayActingAnarchist

> I am inclined to believe your and your bankers' words and good intentions, but what about the next set, or the next? Humans are corruptable, if not through greed than blackmail and intimidation; it's unethical to trust entire economies on someone's good intentions. Yep, these are valid concerns. This is why these protections are enforced cryptographically to the extent possible, relying on distributed trust only when state-of-the-art crypto just isn't up to snuff (or there's an obvious impossibility result in the way). It's not perfect, but it is what it is. > What the central banks are trying to do is too complex to be pulled off, and the tools they require are unacceptably disruptive and easy to abuse. Sure. I am no economist and I won't pretend to be. My point was merely that governments and central bank folks will resist suggestions that they should surrender their ability to try to influence these things. > And, I'm not convinced that deflation was the cause of the Great Depression, or that that kind of deflation is the same as having a hard cap on money supply. I didn't mean to suggest that it was the cause. But economic theory suggests that it is what you should expect. Central banks target 2% inflation for a reason: It incentivizes economic activity. We all hate billionaires. Imagine if the selfish thing to Elon Musk to do was to fire all of his employees, quit investing in R&D, and hodl al his money in a big vault. In a deflationary economy, that would be the only risk-free way for him to ensure that his net worth continues to grow relative to the rest of us. In an inflationary economy, he is forced to invest -- in labour, in R&D, in other companies, etc. -- or else his wealth will slowly dwindle away. You already see people who are worried they will never be able to retire and yet are buying Bitcoin for their kids. Why buy Bitcoin for your kids? Well, if Bitcoin ever becomes the world's currency, it is entirely possible that by the time today's kids grow up, all essentially wealth will be generational wealth. So better start building that generational wealth before it is too late. > Also, curious what you guys come up with. How much of it will be open source or published in some form? A few of the cryptographic primitives I've developed for this project are already published. My "day job" centers around digital liberties and privacy-enhancing technologies, and these tools were all generally useful and not just building blocks for a CBDC. So the publications frame them as tools for censorship circumvention and/or theoretical ZKP constructions and/or new primitives for scalable MPC, without any mention of CBDC applications. And since I am a cryptographer first and a software developer... err, third, very little of my code is likely to ever see deployment in a CBDC, even if the bank ultimately decides to role out something based on my design. At best, some of my low-level crypto code will be in here. And this is all already incorporated into open-source projects, albeit with no obvious signs that it was motivated by/developed for CBDC applications. With that said, my understanding is that the bank ultimately intends to release a full open-source reference implementation of whatever they ultimately roll out, assuming they do ultimately roll something out. As of now, they have not "officially" decided to roll out a CBDC at all, and are currently just exploring what is possible.

nzubemush

I feel you, it's not easy to hodl through the bear. It's all down to conviction which comes from research. Some of those projects have intensified development since the start of the year despite the downtrend. Gives you the sense they are not going away anytime soon. OCEAN is releasing V4 in a couple of days, NEAR raised large funds for bootstrapping development, NGM keeps working on new use cases for the EEUR stablecoin and other, ARGO is rebranding to Spheron and taking their innovation mainstream, GREEN rebranded from DINO to boost sustainability, I just participated in ZKP's upcoming upgrade testnet. This and more for the projects I included. I don't hold all yet, and my buys will be DCA-like.

Suzxy

Truth be told and speaking personally, I am not mentally prepared to watch my portfolio dwindle, I'm not even looking at it right now. All I'm doing now is taking advantage of this market to DCA into the altcoins that I have convictions on and that includes ETH, OCEAN, CTSI, DOT, NEAR, FLD, ZKP, ATOM, to name a few. I'm optimistic but I have it at the back of my mind that things could go in any direction, so I try to prepare for that.

21reasonsto

Since Bitcoin is in essence no crypto and encryption free, Not much at all will happen. Signing can adapt easy ahead of trouble by transition to ZKP, to be at least 10min safe, and the POW can fork on the fly to a new algo. Key is only how much real energy goes into creating one block, fess+blockr3ward determs price in FIAT. Bitcoin was build to stay and replace gold, whatever happens. And it's absolute reasonable to assume that qc error correction is always more costly than to just be smart and use this error correction power for simple mining.

thirtydelta

Oasis supports TEE and ZKP. TEE is better for scalability.

gparty

Oasis Network supports a wide range of secure computing technologies such as TEE, MPC, ZKP, FHE. One of the reasons we use TEE is because of its scalability. As secure computing technologies continue to evolve, we’ll adapt accordingly as well.

tldrthestoryofmylife

The definition I follow (from [the Ethereum docs](https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/scaling/zk-rollups/)) is as follows: > Zero-knowledge rollups (ZK-rollups) bundle (or "roll-up") hundreds of transfers off-chain and generate a cryptographic proof. In other words, a rollup isn't a set of smart contracts, but a proof about a set of transactions. What I mean by "proof" is that it's a commitment (a short signature) that you can use to verify properties of transactions that occurred elsewhere (could be offchain; in fact, that's the point.) In other words, you don't need to run a contract onchain to know that it made a transaction as long as the ZKP proves that it made it. Can you tell me where you got your definition? I'm not sure where that notion of a ZKP, nor terminology about mutability, comes from.

Suzxy

OCEAN is one of the best projects out there in terms of fundamentals. It's always good to see projects \[both established and upcoming\] that are building to solve actual problems in the space and not just looking to chase hypes, I remain bullish on the solid FA projects like OCEAN, FLD, DOT, TEAM, ZKP.

wandererli

They're on Kusama right now, with Calamari, and they said they're not going to work on a Polkadot deployment until things are fully operational on Calamari first. Phala is different, it's for confidential computing and uses trusted execution environments. Manta uses ZKP for on-chain privacy. Combining Phala and Manta would be quite a powerful privacy and data confidentiality win for Polkadot.

wandererli

Polkadot ecosystem is insane because it enables L1 interoperability. I don't think people understand the power of that. There's a project called [Manta Network](https://www.manta.network) that is building L1 privacy with ZKP directly into their network, and enabling that privacy for all other L1s through Polkadot's interoperability. They're already connecting and enabling privacy for other projects. It's like ZCash but you can privatize any token. And it's like Tornado Cash but only pennies to transact, rather than hundreds of dollars in gas fees. Really one of a kind. Polkadot is going to enable so much for the next wave of crypto projects.

jcm2606

They can be, yes, but it's a bit more nuanced than just "yes, they're more centralised than Ethereum" or "no, they're as decentralised as Ethereum". Tl;dr at the bottom, but there's more details below. Generally speaking, L2s split centralisation up into three distinct vectors: off-chain transaction processing, on-chain transaction submission, and on-chain transaction settlement. Quick primer, just in case you don't know what these terms mean and/or don't know how L2s work: L2s basically work by processing transactions off the L1 chain, packing them together into a single batch, and submitting this batch on-chain, where the batch is settled on-chain via a set of smart contracts. *Anyways*, these three stages can have different degrees of centralisation. Generally speaking, the first two stages (processing & submission) will be linked and have the same degree of centralisation, but there *are* networks that have measures in place to try to decentralise one, even though the other is highly or even fully centralised (I'll talk about an example in a bit). The last stage (settlement) is always going to have a different degree of centralisation, and is the one that will typically always be truly decentralised, for reasons I'll go into later. So, first is processing. L2s *are* their own separate networks, and so they typically have their own blockchain or some form of ledger, that is advanced outside of the L1 network. This is where processing takes place, and, generally speaking, this has similar degrees of centralisation to other L1 networks. Some L2s may have a lot of validators and nodes, other L2s may only have a few. Depending on how many validators there are, it may be possible for an L2 to censor you (that is, ignore any of your transactions) if all validators wish to do so, *but* some L2s (mainly Arbitrum) have mechanisms in place to try to prevent this from happening, by having some honest validators be able to watch a transaction inbox on the L1 side and raise a flag or force your transaction inbox through, if it isn't being processed by the L2 network in a timely fashion. Next is submission. L2s need to get their state (balances of all users and contracts) onto the L1 network somehow, and this is the role of the submission stage. To my knowledge, there are currently two different approaches of handling submission: have a single sequencer node (a type of node responsible for submitting batches of transactions to the L1 network) that has full control over the submission process, and have a set of sequencers that works similarly to PoS, with each sequencer maintaining a stake and either being rewarded for good behaviour, or being slashed/punished for bad behaviour and replaced with another sequencer from the set. Most L2s use the former approach, deploying a fully centralised sequencer that's responsible for all transaction submission to the L1 network (though this sequencer may be subject to the same mechanisms I listed above for processing, where L2 validators watch a transaction inbox on the L1 network and raise a flag or force a transaction through if the sequencer didn't include it in the batch), but some use the latter approach (namely zkSync), where they use a set of sequencers that are managed by a PoS-esque system. Finally, we have settlement. Once the state is on the L1 network, it's recorded within that L1 block and certain data within the L2's smart contracts is updated to reflect the new state. As I said way above, this stage is typically the one that is truly decentralised, as it inherits the security of the L1 network due to the fact that everything's handled by L1 smart contracts. These smart contracts are typically designed to check the validity of the state they're receiving (either by opening up a challenge period in the case of optimistic rollups, where other L1 users can verify the new state and raise a flag if they detect any foul play, or by verifying a zero-knowledge proof (aka a ZKP) that's accompanied the new state in the case of ZK rollups, which is difficult to generate and essentially states that everything within the new state is valid without needing to know the pertinent details, thanks to ~~black magic~~ cryptography), and as such the L1 network is the one that ultimately gives the final seal of approval on everything. There's more things that could be added, like the fact that with ZK rollups in particular, you can actually choose to leave your balance out of the new state, instead relying on the ZKP to have the L1 network acknowledge that the L2 did everything right (your balance is still stored, just off the L1 network, so you'll either need to store it yourself or rely on the L2 to keep it secure and provide it should you choose to move back to the L1 network), but that's basically the gist of the three vectors of centralisation. If I had to sum it all up in a way that's concise (ie in a tl;dr fashion), then it'd have to be that while an L2 can censor you and prevent you from transacting within it, it cannot steal your funds, it cannot lose your funds (should the L2 network go down and all data within the L2 network be erased), and, provided the necessary mechanisms are in place, it cannot prevent you from forcefully pulling your funds out from the L1 side.

Nanarcho_Cumianist

lol, its not just Orchard that is risky, [ALL of Zcash is still risky](https://i.imgur.com/izFlALk.png) due to the underlying cryptography (zk-SNARKs) being so new and unproven. So its about irresponsibly marketing experimental technology that could still prove fatally broken as production-ready, all it takes is one math error in the right place and its game over. And its going to take YEARS more peer review and battle-testing before this risk will be mitigated to an acceptable degree. On the other hand, Monero's triple cocktail of ring signatures, ZKP and stealth addresses (all based on established & battle-tested cryptography) has already proven itself VERY reliable with 6+ years of battle-testing on the darknet, THAT is why Monero continues to dominate the privacy coin sector.

algiuxass

Hmm, you guys write quite a bit of "articles", but I can't really find them to read easily from the home page. Just saw one like 4 posts above about ZKP (Zero knowledge proof).

gluk64

1. ZKP solves the validity problem for blockchains, consensus solves canonicality. These two things are independent. 2. Yes, GPUs can be put to use for decentralized ZKP generation. We think this is the future of this tech.

bstr156

​ 1. Do you think that ZKP technology in the future could potentially disrupt the need for the consensus models we know today? What are your thoughts on that, and how far away do you think that might be? Is there anyone leading the way on that kind of academic research? 2. Do you see what are typically thought of as "miners" eventually playing a role in ZK-Rollups? How might that look? Could GPUs be put to important use here, maybe for computing proofs or something else? Would be nice for them to have a useful role once Ethereum's shift to PoS is complete.

gluk64

We expect a boom of private applications on zkSync as L3s! Such L3 will be cheap and organic on zkSync (in contrast to optimistic rollups), because they will use our native mechanism of recursive verification of zero-knowledge proofs. Non-ZKP protocols (such as Secret Network) use Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) for privacy. As the name suggests, they are not trustless, but instead rely on centralized entities like Intel for security and privacy. We find this approach questionable in the context of blockchains since such entities are highly dependent on their respective governments. Also, TEEs have a [notorious history](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3456631) of serious security breaches. Unlike ZKPs that depend on pure peer-reviewed math, TEEs are subject to physical exploits, which are even theoretically impossible to fully prevent.

Superb_Ad_4981

Is ZKP finality probabilistic?

Fahdis

Only because you don't understand that we are trying to change the whole traditional financial system by getting rid of banks and the middle man. The whole aspect of a public blockchain also makes it easier to do your own taxes with your wallet or wallets if its just a ledger of ins and outs. There can also be private wallets with ZKP for different affairs. The only reason this hasn't happened is that we are stuck in Limbo and have to use on and off ramps to do the work through CEX's for the time being aside from being an asset instead of currency. The moment its used as currency, I am never touching Filthy Inflation Fiat ever again.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Polygon has launched a self-sovereign, zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) identity service called Polygon ID. The solution will enable users to verify their credentials and identity without revealing any personal information. Polygon has committed $1 billion to fund projects exploring and implementing the technology. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

raymonddurk

Adam Back and Pieter Wuille talking about sidechains 2015 (What became liquid the sidechains for volcano bonds) https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS9sS21RREc5Ug/episode/aHR0cHM6Ly9lcGljZW50ZXIudHYvMDY1Lw?ep=14 Joseph Poon and Tradge Dryja on the lightning network white paper (2015) https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS9sS21RREc5Ug/episode/aHR0cHM6Ly9lcGljZW50ZXIudHYvMDgwLw?ep=14 Snarks, starks, and bulletproofs (2018) the stuff that became the latest HRF grand for ZKP https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zb3VuZGNsb3VkLmNvbS91c2Vycy9zb3VuZGNsb3VkOnVzZXJzOjE0NzI3NTUwMy9zb3VuZHMucnNz/episode/dGFnOnNvdW5kY2xvdWQsMjAxMDp0cmFja3MvNDEyMzgzODk0?ep=14 All of Andreas' stuff where he was on an actual stage for 45 minutes or so. There's at least 10 good ones for beginners. Michael Flaxman on security (newer but worth the listen) https://youtu.be/O0HsoGWqhh4

WittyStick

Yes, and no. The biggest difficulty is not planning, but doing. You can plan all you want, but there exists nobody in bitcoin who is capable of implementing your plan, and this is by design. It's a feature, and without it, the main benefits of bitcoin would be lost. To get something implemented in bitcoin, you need to be able to convince a majority of miners to adopt your implementation, and it needs to be developed in a way that those miners' blocks will not get ignored by the economic users of bitcoin for being invalid as per the existing rules of consensus. In other words. You need a soft-fork or you are wasting your time, and even if you can come up with a way to soft-fork in a ZKP, there's no guarantee it will be adopted. To my knowledge, nobody has presented a palatable proposal to soft-fork a privacy-enhancing ZKP solution into bitcoin, and my expectation is that anything which might make the total bitcoin supply non-auditable by all users is more or less dead on arrival. It shall not pass. So effort is probably better spent elsewhere, such as second layer solutions pegged to bitcoin in some form.

brothapipp

What other ZKP’s blocks chains are there? And start ups i can focus on?

Suzxy

This much is obvious. I believe crypto adoption will grow exceptionally this year, we are already seeing it happen, it is just a matter of time before it really goes mainstream. Solid and undervalued projects in every sector, OIN, SAND, OCEAN, MANA, NGM, UTK, ZKP etc will aid in that growth.