> Doesn't it just have to prove that: > > "If the proof verifier accepts P, then either P or the old proof-verifier > would have accepted P"
I phrased that badly; I meant: "If the proof verifier accepts P, then either P is true or the old proof-verifier would have accepted P" ben ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
