The definition of laborious fork is that it is a rest of the consensus guidelines; in different phrases, some blocks at the moment are legitimate that beforehand would not be legitimate. As a result of a block with some transactions changed with a ZKP would not beforehand be legitimate, that is by definition a tough fork.
Whether or not this is able to really find yourself splitting the community depends upon what the trusted committee would do:
The Good
The allegedly leaked messages recommend that such information deletion would solely apply to “buried” blocks, i.e. not the latest block. On this case the unique transaction information would already be broadly disseminated; so long as there are some nodes working the pre-fork model, the information ought to stay out there for newly spun up pre-fork nodes to sync.
The Unhealthy
Nevertheless, there seems to be nothing stopping the trusted committee from colluding and deleting information this fashion from a transaction that was by no means made public, after which getting a miner to incorporate it in a block. On this case the community would break up, as pre-fork nodes would by no means obtain the unique transaction information wanted to confirm and settle for the block.
The Ugly
The present state-of-the-art ZKP techniques for verifying the Bitcoin blockchain (e.g. Raito) are (so far as I do know) at the moment restricted to verifying the longest header chain and transaction inclusion; they can not but confirm script execution. If this proposed fork is to be deployed anytime quickly, it appears doubtless that the ZKP would not really absolutely validate the spending circumstances of the transaction inputs, opening up the opportunity of the committee colluding and stealing funds.
