Yeah I have worked on shortening it a lot, went from 32 pages to 26 pages to now 16.
keep it up, the paper has to be a lot shorter than this. check out bitcoin paper for example. it doesn't explain any details, it is more like the abstract explanation of the whole project while focusing only on important matters.
you already have a website, add a section to it called "wiki" or something like that where you could just copy all of the extra information there.
Scroda ID would not have to be used all the time, it is useful in the case of which you want to have yourself identified for specific purposes say it could be used in a voting system, account creation/identification and the sorts.
No it would not have to be used every time, it could be beneficial in order to store your keys still you always have the option to store it offline. As your Scroda ID is not needed when conducting private transactions.
Scroda ID is mostly beneficial also to identify those who are wanting to uphold the system(nodes in who have the power to verify transactions) allowing the system to move away from PoW or PoS.
ok, that makes more sense now. but then if it is like an optional feature you can't include it as a main thing in your project. it is more like the BIPs (bitcoin improvement protocols like HD wallets and mnemonics), they aren't part of the protocol, they are improvement of it.
What exactly would you disagree on in the dangers of self-storing private keys? Many agree that it is vulnerable to hack/theft and can be misplaced/lost, it has happened to me and it has happened to others. Many projects have proposed solutions to the self storage of private keys and many people have supported the idea still they are built on weak identification methods such as fingerprints in which can easily obtained without the users knowledge. Are you saying that such methods use as fingerprints are not easy to obtain?
well, all the cases i have seen where people lose their keys is user mistakes such as installing a malicious software, having key loggers, even bugs in some wallet implementations (eg. reused k values for signing),... and then most of the other ways i have seen such as fingerprint could potentially be vulnerable for the same users under same conditions. for example if they install the same malicious software they can lose their coins just the same!
as for methods i didn't have fingerprint in mind, mainly the DNA thing and the EEG that was mentioned in the article.
Also dangers in what sense in part of the EEG? will it do you any harm to your brain? no that's why we have the information on how EEG has been used before it is non intrusive, does no damage. Could you please clarify on your end so that I could give a better response if needed.
it seems i was wrong about this. i did some search and it appears that EEG is a safe procedure and the only complication i could find was the possibility of causing seizure in people with epilepsy .