I do not suppose there’s a elementary distinction between commit-reveal and commit-prove: in commit-reveal the “proof” is simply instantiated with the only potential strategy: revealing the underlying information.
In a approach, taproot is a restricted step in the direction of a much less revealing proof already. For key path spends, it avoids revealing the existence of the script tree solely. For script path spends, it solely reveals the interior key, the leaf script used, and the depth within the tree, however not the existence or contents of potential different leaves.
MuSig, or different key aggregation schemes, regardless that they don’t seem to be a part of the consensus guidelines, will also be thought as primarily evolutions in the direction of revealing much less. From the attitude of pockets customers, it means solely revealing an combination key and an combination signature to the chain. The mixture secret’s successfully a dedication to the person person keys. The mixture signature is the proof.
I believe evolution in the direction of revealing much less is usually fascinating as a privateness enchancment, however there are numerous sensible concerns that make it a fragile steadiness. We’d like small proofs, environment friendly verification, conservative safety assumptions, earlier than the trouble of aiming for a consensus change turns into value it.
Bitcoin can evolve in no matter approach its customers demand.
