taproot

#BTC
There are many features Taproot came with which people are still discussing, and that’s the case more than a year after the initial upgrades. Most developers and enthusiasts still wonder how it affected the speed of transactions, the partitioning of the network, and the mission of Bitcoin, especially since the upgrades have gotten mixed reviews from different users. Some people consider Taproot the next step towards better network privacy and scalability, its biggest opponents, like Jimmy Song and other Bitcoin Core developers, are saying that the ability to do Ordinal and BRC-20 transactions flooded the network with non-financial spam, which is a consequence of Taproot. supporters of Bitcoin Ordinals like Leonidas, argue that Taproot has increased transaction sharpening which deepens the polarization over Bitcoin’s future and its use, turning it from a mere electronic cash system to a versatile network, this position is becoming increasingly dominant.
Promises And Pitfalls Of Taproot
The purported benefits of the Taproot upgrade were to improve Bitcoin’s privacy, efficiency, and smart contract functionality and were to be implemented through Schnorr Signatures (BIP 340), Taproot (BIP 341), and Tapscript (BIP 342). Taproot also replaced the ECDSA using Schnorr Signatures and integrated Merklized Alternative Script Trees (MAST) to improve privacy through the bundling of multiple transaction signatures into one, thus reducing data size and fees. The upgrade was poised to enhance the efficiency of multisig transactions and unlock more complex scenarios in Bitcoin key recovery.
In contrast, some of the promises Taproot made were not delivered, according to prominent Bitcoin Core developer Jimmy Song. In a video released recently, Song explained that the upgrade made room for possible ‘social attack surfaces’ which enabled the flood of data-heavy transactions from other financial tools like Ordinals and BRC-20s. Schnorr signatures and Script Paths Spend, according to him, more than increased the number of rounds in which a signature was needed to be signed, thus offering a bad user experience. Song said that the limited use of Taproot’s privacy features was the result of complex and cumbersome processes.
Innovation Divide - New Applications vs. Bitcoin's Original Vision
Within the Taproot controversy rests a deeper philosophical schism within the Bitcoin community. On the one hand there are Bitcoin purists like Song, Adam Back and Luke Dashjr. They hold that Bitcoin should remain a decentralized system for peer-to peer electronic, cash system, focusing primarily on financial transactions as espoused by Satoshi Nakamoto. All other uses, especially non-financial uses, like Ordinals, which piggybacks on the blockchain to add digital collectibles, and BRC-20s, that introduces token standards for fungible assets, are punishingly transactions, clutter the system, and serve network users.
Defenders of Taproot, like Leonidas, a leading light of the Bitcoin Ordinals movement, on the other hand, is of the view that Taproot is more flexible and versatile, and as such, has more positive and responsive uses like Ordinals and Runes, which serve to broaden and add value to Bitcoin. More importantly, Leonidas adds that, contrary to the criticisms of network ne, the developments have reinforced network security as they have generated more than $500 million in transaction fees since their inception. This is a powerful offset for the concerns about the declining mining block subsidy, projected to halve again in 2028. On the other hand, data from 2025 is quite revealing, with the Ordinals inscriptions exhibiting erratic fee contributions, ranging from $3,060 - to $537,400 daily, reaching a peak of $9.99 million on December 16, 2023, which only serves to highlight the questions surrounding the long term viability of these systems as reliable sources of revenue.
OP_RETURN and Transaction Validation Tensions
As of the Ionosphere Conference, July 2025, the topic of transaction validation and the data kept on the Bitcoin blockchain has come to the forefront of discussion yet again. In June 2025, more than 30 Bitcoin Core developers reached a consensus to eliminate the 80-byte limit on the OP_RETURN function, which the function was designed to support additional onchain data. This change was meant to support the purposes of Taproot, which has come under fire from those who believe that it supports bloat on the Bitcoin blockchain. Some developers and miners have said that they are concerned about the possibility of a reversal on this change, and this has sparked interest in Bitcoin Knots, a competing Bitcoin client that has more aggressive transaction censorship policies in order to funnel more transactions that are purely financial.
The discord over validation frames something more abstract. Is it better to allow all forms of transactions on Bitcoin’s blockchain, or to limit transactions to those that are in its greatest alignment with the core purpose of the currency? Ordinals has its critics, and they would say that the disregarded data restriction has the potential to convert Bitcoin into a mundane database, while others will say that transaction censorship is the very antithesis of what the system claims to offer.
The past and distinct possibilities of Taproot enrichment and innovation.
Song still predicts that Taproot might and could still serve as a conduit for the evolution of bitcoin, albeit with a renewed emphasis on privacy and efficiency. Proponents like Leonidas emphasize its revenue potential and innovation-driven use cases, like the high-value Ordinals transactions and the increasing use of Runes. They, nonetheless, admit that the fee-less layers and congestion-associated fee-recurrent systems triggered by this Ordinals and Runes ecosystem remain a hot debate, with spikes and declines in daily transactions still a volatility issue.
No one can deny however that, the Taproot upgrade did increase the potential of bitcoin. Unfortunately, the collateral effects that arose as a Taproot Updates did, polarised the community. With Taproot’s polarizing aspects still fresh on the minds of the community members, discussions around the foregoing block subsidy halving are bound to reignite this friction. It is the evolution 'v' bitcoin's traditional elements' argument with developers, miners, and users as the worrying constant in a battle without a victor.
Anticipating the Future: Understanding Bitcoin's Identity Changes
The controversy of Bitcoin’s Taproot upgrade continues to bring to light Bitcoin’s new roles within the digital economy. The upgrade’s innovative features have strengthened the nonfinancial sectors of the economy especially its privacy and smart contracts. This has ignited a communal introspection. The controversy’s resolution—be it through changing protocols, achieving a community consensus, or alternative implementations like Bitcoin Knots—will Bitcoin’s future. It will steer the currency through the multiple conflicting intent Bitcoin has of itself.
The ever-growing set of Bitcoin Stakeholders will have to come to an understanding on the challenges presented by innovation, and the need for a conservative approach to Bitcoin’s origins. The world’s most prominent digital currency is directly under threat, and its position is no longer guaranteed. The tether and consensus surrounding the Taproot Change Bitcoin's fee shift is Bitcoin’s most systemic move in the journey towards an ecologically and socially acceptable future.
#bitcoin #Taproot

互联网计算机继续改善跨链互操作性，Deuterium 里程碑使容器能够创建阈值 Schnorr 签名，包括比特币中使用的 BIP340 标准化的 Schnorr，Deuterium 使容器能够生成 Pay-To-Taproot（P2TR）地址并发起 Taproot 交易。
在这篇博文中，我们将解释互联网计算机上 P2TR 支持的发展、容器最初面临的限制，以及最近在阈值 Schnorr 签名中添加的密钥调整如何扩展容器智能合约的跨链功能，使其更容易与比特币元协议集成。
P2TR 地址
BIP341 中指定的 P2TR 地址允许使用两种不同的“路径”来花费资金：
密钥路径：如果通过密钥路径进行的交易包含可使用 P2TR 地址中指定的公钥成功验证的 Schnorr 签名，则该交易有效。脚本路径：通过脚本路径进行的交易要求支出者使用比特币的脚本操作码提供满足任意脚本的输入，脚本路径的一个关键特性是，一个地址可以包含多个脚本（其中任何一个都可用于支出资金），在支出发生之前，满足条件的脚本的内容（甚至数量）都是保密的，此外，即使在支出之后，也只有实际用于满足条件的脚本输入才会公开。

此外，如果地址同时支持密钥和脚本路径，则通过密钥路径进行消费会隐藏脚本路径的存在，这些属性提高了交易的隐私性，因为链观察者无法推断特定地址的内部财务安排，例如多重签名设置的存在。
P2TR 对 ICP 的初始限制
最初，互联网计算机仅支持有限类型的 P2TR 地址，从而限制了可用的支付机制：
无脚本路径的 P2TR：这种类型的地址不包含替代脚本的 Merkle 树，这意味着它只能通过密钥路径使用，互联网计算机从 Deuterium 里程碑发布开始就支持这一点，因为密钥路径花费只需要有效的 Schnorr 签名，并且故意省略了 Merkle 根以隐藏是否存在任何替代花费脚本。没有可用密钥路径的 P2TR：这种类型的地址只能通过脚本路径使用，其中可能包括 Merkle 树叶子内的 Schnorr 公钥，虽然这些地址包含密钥路径的内部公钥，但互联网计算机不支持使用它进行签名。
此限制意味着创建 P2TR 地址的容器必须提前选择要支持哪一条路径，容器不能创建允许同时通过密钥路径和脚本路径进行消费的地址。
阈值 Schnorr 签名的密钥调整
从 P2TR 地址消费涉及使用通过加性密钥派生方案从内部密钥派生的公钥创建签名，此过程涉及：
对内部公钥和 Merkle 树根（代表替代脚本）进行哈希，以得出“附加调整”；将此调整添加到秘密密钥和内部公钥中；使用调整后的密钥生成与地址中嵌入的调整后的公钥相对应的签名。
在 Schnorr 签名的阈值变体中，密钥调整本质上更为复杂，因为密钥并不以完整形式存在，相反，它分布在子网中运行的多个副本中，每个副本都持有密钥的一部分，要求每个副本将调整应用于各自的部分。
当 Deuterium 里程碑发布时，互联网计算机在请求阈值 Schnorr 签名时不支持密钥调整，这意味着容器无法生成允许密钥路径和脚本路径支出的 P2TR 地址，因此，容器必须在创建地址时决定如何使用资金，从而降低了需要动态支出选项的 Dapp 的灵活性。
此外，大多数比特币库本身并不支持 Taproot 地址，这些地址可以通过密钥路径使用未经调整的密钥来使用，将阈值 Schnorr 签名集成到 Dapp 中的开发人员需要更深入地了解 Taproot 机制。
扩展 ICP 上的 P2TR 支持
我们很高兴地宣布，Schnorr 签名 API 现在支持密钥调整 - 容器现在可以创建更常见、更灵活的 Taproot 地址，这些地址使用经过调整的内部密钥支持脚本路径和密钥路径支出，此增强功能：
将互联网计算机与标准 Taproot 功能相结合；简化 Dapp 创建者的开发；扩展了基于比特币的智能合约在互联网计算机上的灵活性。
新的密钥调整功能可作为现有 sign_with_schnorr API 中的可选辅助参数使用，此附加功能允许开发人员将 MAST 根包含在其签名请求中，从而完全支持互联网计算机上 Taproot 的脚本路径支出机制。
具体来说，sign_with_schnorr API 的参数 sign_with_schnorr_args 已扩展为可选字段 aux，用于指定一些辅助信息，最初，此枚举将有一个 BIP341 变体，用于指定 Merkle 脚本路径的根哈希，API 的进一步扩展可以重用此辅助输入来编码其他辅助信息。
这个新的接口允许应用程序完全支持 Taproot 支持的一系列交易，确保在互联网计算机上运行的容器可以参与任何比特币元协议，例如 Ordinals、BRC-20、Runes、Atomical 等。
有关更多详细信息，请查阅互联网计算机规范、链融合文档、BIP341 规范，以及包含处理 Taproot 支出示例的互联网计算机示例库。

#Taproot #P2TR #Schnorr $ICP

你关心的 IC 内容
技术进展 | 项目信息 | 全球活动

收藏关注 IC 币安频道
掌握最新资讯

1.Institutional Adoption Accelerates
Expect a surge in institutional interest as banks and asset managers enter the fray. Experts at the Paris Blockchain Week anticipate global banks expanding Bitcoin services later in 2025 as regulations evolve  .Major European institutions are already getting involved—Italy’s largest bank acquired Bitcoin directly, signaling broader financial integration  .
2.Bitcoin Becomes a Strategic Reserve Asset
The US government, under an executive order from March 2025, is creating a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve—using seized BTC to support state holdings  .On the state level, Texas has passed legislation approving a Bitcoin reserve fund, joining other states adopting similar strategies  .
3.Innovations Showcased at Bitcoin 2025 Conference
Tether’s Bold Claim: Tether revealed plans to become the world’s largest Bitcoin miner, backed by over 100,000 BTC holdings and $2 billion in energy investments  .Arkade by Ark Labs: Introduced a programmable execution layer on Bitcoin, enabling developers to build apps on-chain without altering Bitcoin’s core consensus—expanding use cases significantly  .
4.Taproot Unlocks Smarter, Cheaper Transactions
Taproot adoption is gaining momentum, enabling enhanced privacy, lower fees (20–30% reductions for complex transactions), and support for advanced smart-like features via Lightning and Taproot Assets  .This paves the way for Bitcoin to evolve beyond a store-of-value into a more programmable, utility-rich platform.
5.Real-World Crypto Usage Expands
Jack Dorsey’s Block (formerly Square) unveiled real-time Lightning Network payments during Bitcoin 2025—bringing super-fast, low-fee BTC payments to everyday users  .The global Bitcoin payment ecosystem is projected to be worth $2.77 billion by 2029—a testament to growing demand  .
Summary
Bitcoin in 2025:
Institutions & Banks enter Bitcoin like never before.Government-backed reserves in the U.S. and Texas legitimize crypto as an asset class.Conference breakthroughs reveal programmable layers and mining dominance.Taproot boosts privacy, speed, and transaction flexibility.Lightning payments from Square make Bitcoin practical for everyday purchases.

#Bitcoin2025 #CryptoRevolution #Taproot #InstitutionalAdoption