📅 Original date posted:2014-04-22
📝 Original message:I am concerned about space, but more about usability :-)
I'll definitely use both M and the checksum.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>wrote:
> On Tuesday, 22 April 2014, at 10:39 am, Jan Møller wrote:
> > Necessary Shares = M+1, not a problem
> >
> > I would probably encode N-of-M in 1 byte as I don't see good use cases
> with
> > more than 17 shares. Anyway, I am fine with it as it is.
>
> I agree that M > 16 is probably not a viable use case for human beings,
> but machines would probably be able to make use of it. I, for one, welcome
> our new robot overlords.
>
> Also, the byte that encodes M−1 is optional, so if you're concerned about
> space, you can omit it (and the checksum).
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140422/65bfc4e4/attachment.html>;
Jan Møller [ARCHIVE] /
npub1sv…jg7a4
2023-06-07 15:17:11
in reply to nevent1q…n09w
Author Public Key
npub1sv4psc5psjztuewa8xzcxrdsm743zl3lvje7ha36xp3da86hmpyqdjg7a4Published at
2023-06-07 15:17:11Event JSON
{
"id": "87847e2b25d13ed58bdd0bb92a97e1b500764cdba2eb17e38687b16e5946cfd3",
"pubkey": "832a1862818484be65dd3985830db0dfab117e3f64b3ebf63a3062de9f57d848",
"created_at": 1686151031,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ec3db7ea61043d2181c683590cc6472afc1e727a155c1437be680d2ee4f9939c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e8db6b530f09ea04c55d88eb947616d799b72eb39d670f7715eb6a5d3b0cf098",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f00d0858b09287e941ccbc491567cc70bdbc62d714628b167c1b76e7fef04d91"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-04-22\n📝 Original message:I am concerned about space, but more about usability :-)\n I'll definitely use both M and the checksum.\n\n\nOn Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Matt Whitlock \u003cbip at mattwhitlock.name\u003ewrote:\n\n\u003e On Tuesday, 22 April 2014, at 10:39 am, Jan Møller wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Necessary Shares = M+1, not a problem\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e I would probably encode N-of-M in 1 byte as I don't see good use cases\n\u003e with\n\u003e \u003e more than 17 shares. Anyway, I am fine with it as it is.\n\u003e\n\u003e I agree that M \u003e 16 is probably not a viable use case for human beings,\n\u003e but machines would probably be able to make use of it. I, for one, welcome\n\u003e our new robot overlords.\n\u003e\n\u003e Also, the byte that encodes M−1 is optional, so if you're concerned about\n\u003e space, you can omit it (and the checksum).\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140422/65bfc4e4/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "199786a661a001a4643834aa939fc49342f33979b11f81e34e0a6201ad8ce26156b2d4e33d6316f4741707e13940a4ce3001aec9564cd1a1e44d525e0486d3ca"
}