On 2020-11-23 12:24, AdamISZ via bitcoin-dev wrote:
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, 23 November 2020 00:40, AdamISZ via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Canvassing opinions/critiques from those working on bitcoin and
related protocols.
See the attached gist for a write-up of an outline of an idea, which
is conceived for joinmarket but can apply in other scenarios where
there is market for liquidity and in which privacy is a very high
priority (hence 'bitcoin fungibility markets' can certainly include
coinswap along with coinjoin, but possibly other things):
https://gist.github.com/AdamISZ/b52704905cdd914ec9dac9fc52b621d6
Greg Maxwell pointed out to me on IRC that this idea doesn't work:
there is only a receipt on the commitment to the offer (message) from
the maker, not on the plaintext version, hence there is nothing
stopping the maker from falsely claiming censorship after not sending
the plaintext.
Reflecting on this a bit more, my intuition is that this problem is
much more difficult than I had hoped; if there is a solution I suspect
it involves much more sophisticated ideas. Many solutions just end up
begging the question by presuming the existence of an uncensorable BB
in order to create a new one; and/or use the blockchain for that
function, but that is too slow and expensive, usually. I'd be happy to
be proved wrong, though :)
waxwing
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Blockchains are bad for this, because you don't want for it to cost
money to use your bulletin board. However, the problem was solved more
than a decade ago. Look into FMS, which combines Usenet/mailing lists
with a web of trust for spam resistance.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
