Should we implement an mechanism where every post burns a certain amount of  $ANON? This might reduce low quality posts

https://anoncast.org | anonymous posting for $ANON holders, powered by zk proofs | CA 0x0Db510e79909666d6dEc7f5e49370838c16D950f @anontokenbase

would be hard to implement without creating an on-chain trail that negates the anonymity.

Actually very doable without compromising anonymity. See the ideas in the lower parts of this post:

Actually very doable without compromising anonymity. See the ideas in the lower parts of this post:

http://localhost:2000/blog/site/general/2022/06/15/using_snarks.html

I remember learning zk with these series of posts,
it was like alien tech until I read that post explaining the math behind, ty

reading this one later tonight again, may refresh my ideas..

https://vitalik.eth.link/general/2022/06/15/using_snarks.html

Dumb question:

If someone collected a nontrivial number of “the best” anon casts from here, is there any way the original casters could prove they authored at least one of those casts WITHOUT revealing their identity? 

e.g. if someone wanted to use that array of casts as gating criteria to post to a new channel

Another question I saw pop up asking if privacy preservation was possible while still proving authorship of 1 out of a many anon post array 

Any idea on this by chance?

Another question I saw pop up asking if privacy preservation was possible while still proving authorship of 1 out of a many anon post array 

Any idea on this by chance?

https://warpcast.com/anoncast/0x13c22eca

Full-time builder. @pimlico | @33bits | farcaster-solidity | x.com/potekhin_sergey. Zero-knowledge and asynchronous transactions evangelist.