01:20:07 <sarang> Just caught up with the channel
01:20:35 <sarang> Regarding BP+, I revisited some operation counts and do not expect that we would see the kinds of verification time improvements suggested by the CCS proposal
01:20:57 <sarang> Verification should be marginally faster at best
01:21:09 <sarang> That being said, the space savings are immediate and known
01:21:37 <moneromooo> aw...
01:22:40 <sarang> It's not entirely clear why the proposers saw such an improvement, but I suspect they didn't account for all common generators like we do
01:22:45 <sarang> (and like we would for BP+)
01:22:58 <sarang> However, verification would certainly not be any _slower_
01:24:26 <sarang> I'll write up some details and add them to the CCS to see if the proposers can help me understand why they saw the improvements they did
01:24:40 <sarang> (this is why I prefer operation counts... they used entirely different libraries)
02:47:18 <gingeropolous> u think thats legit jwinterm ?
03:04:58 <sarang> Doesn't support d-LRS natively
03:05:16 <sarang> Therefore doesn't work with commitments
03:05:43 <sarang> The protocol presently requires a 2-LRS, not merely an LRS
03:06:00 <sarang> ^ jwinterm gingeropolous
03:42:32 <jwinterm> gingeropolous, if I could answer that question I'd be a mathemagician
05:47:37 <needmoney90> Jwinterm it's okay that's why we pay people to do the mathstronomy and mathstrology for us
05:47:55 <needmoney90> I think one of those is pseudoscience though
05:48:25 * needmoney90 slinks away back into lounge after realizing where he is