Peter Todd wrote:
>Two serious issues with this proposal:
>1) You're creating an alternative implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. There
>is a _long_ history of such implementations failing to implement an exact copy
>of the consensus rules, leading to potential forks. Obviously, if only used by
>otherwise lite clients, there is less of a risk associated with this. But the
>risk is there and will expand as this tech is used for more sophisticated
>things.
There is a general purpose zkVM implementation for the RISC-V instruction set:
Since Bitcoin Core can be compiled for RISC-V, and RiscZero can prove
execution traces of a RISC-V VM, this argument no longer applies: the exact
consensus rules would be applied and verified.
@blk014