📅 Original date posted:2022-03-05
📝 Original message:There's no point to pegging coins that are worthless into a system of also
worthless coins, unless you want to test the mechanism of testing pegging.
As is, it's hard enough to get people set up on a signet, if they have to
run two nodes and then scramble to find testnet coins and then peg them
were just raising the barriers to entry for starting to use a signet for
testing.
If anything I think we should permanently shutter testnet now that signet
is available.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2022, 3:53 PM vjudeu via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> In testnet3, anyone can become a miner, it is possible to even mine a
> block on some CPU, because the difficulty can drop to one. In signet, we
> create some challenge, for example 1-of-2 multisig, that can restrict who
> can mine, so that chain can be "unreliably reliable". Then, my question is:
> why signets are introducing new coins out of thin air, instead of forming
> two-way peg-in between testnet3 and signet?
>
> The lack of coins is not a bug, it is a feature. We have more halvings in
> testnet3 than in mainnet or signets, but it can be good, we can use this to
> see, what can happen with a chain after many halvings. Also, in testnet3
> there is no need to have any coins if we are mining. Miners can create,
> move and destroy zero satoshis. They can also extend the precision of the
> coins, so a single coin in testnet3 can be represented as a thousand of
> coins in some signet sidechain.
>
> Recently, there are some discussions regarding sidechains. Before they
> will become a real thing, running on mainnet, they should be tested.
> Nowadays, a popular way of testing new features is creating a new signet
> with new rules. But the question still remains: why we need new coins,
> created out of thin air? And even when some signet wants to do that, then
> why it is not pegged into testnet3? Then it would have as much chainwork
> protection as testnet3!
>
> It seems that testnet3 is good enough to represent the main chain during
> sidechain testing. It is permissionless and open, anyone can start mining
> sidechain blocks, anyone with a CPU can be lucky and find a block with the
> minimal difficulty. Also, because of blockstorms and regular chain reorgs,
> some extreme scenarios, like stealing all coins from some sidechain, can be
> tested in a public way, because that "unfriendly and unstable" environment
> can be used to test stronger attacks than in a typical chain.
>
> Putting that proposal into practice can be simple and require just
> creating one Taproot address per signet in testnet3. Then, it is possible
> to create one testnet transaction (every three months) that would move
> coins to and from testnet3, so the same coins could travel between many
> signets. New signets can be pegged in with 1:1 ratio, existing signets can
> be transformed into signet sidechains (the signet miners rule that chains,
> so they can enforce any transition rules they need).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220305/b5cb634a/attachment-0001.html>;
Jeremy Rubin [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xu…fzef0
2023-06-07 23:05:26
in reply to nevent1q…2qrg
Author Public Key
npub1xukrzempxc95ags094lgrfvnvwm7gkuwj3d98qwrzgsynskyhp9qkfzef0Published at
2023-06-07 23:05:26Event JSON
{
"id": "d388ca0fec6812b52bbb33004c19d7e2944bc0cf11a521576ebd7faa505db210",
"pubkey": "372c316761360b4ea20f2d7e81a59363b7e45b8e945a5381c3122049c2c4b84a",
"created_at": 1686179126,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"12ec7ad83aa898e9968e00ed9d04920d79d511ac2fc72f0155abff32cb07881c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"437be3bdf6441e08c752c675433a91cf08faa2d0de31622436f6e2e98d5599b6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"8d3cf7eba921036409f1fec074cf8cfd8925bc7cb18e35d358b1ccc89752ee32"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2022-03-05\n📝 Original message:There's no point to pegging coins that are worthless into a system of also\nworthless coins, unless you want to test the mechanism of testing pegging.\n\nAs is, it's hard enough to get people set up on a signet, if they have to\nrun two nodes and then scramble to find testnet coins and then peg them\nwere just raising the barriers to entry for starting to use a signet for\ntesting.\n\n\nIf anything I think we should permanently shutter testnet now that signet\nis available.\n\nOn Sat, Mar 5, 2022, 3:53 PM vjudeu via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e In testnet3, anyone can become a miner, it is possible to even mine a\n\u003e block on some CPU, because the difficulty can drop to one. In signet, we\n\u003e create some challenge, for example 1-of-2 multisig, that can restrict who\n\u003e can mine, so that chain can be \"unreliably reliable\". Then, my question is:\n\u003e why signets are introducing new coins out of thin air, instead of forming\n\u003e two-way peg-in between testnet3 and signet?\n\u003e\n\u003e The lack of coins is not a bug, it is a feature. We have more halvings in\n\u003e testnet3 than in mainnet or signets, but it can be good, we can use this to\n\u003e see, what can happen with a chain after many halvings. Also, in testnet3\n\u003e there is no need to have any coins if we are mining. Miners can create,\n\u003e move and destroy zero satoshis. They can also extend the precision of the\n\u003e coins, so a single coin in testnet3 can be represented as a thousand of\n\u003e coins in some signet sidechain.\n\u003e\n\u003e Recently, there are some discussions regarding sidechains. Before they\n\u003e will become a real thing, running on mainnet, they should be tested.\n\u003e Nowadays, a popular way of testing new features is creating a new signet\n\u003e with new rules. But the question still remains: why we need new coins,\n\u003e created out of thin air? And even when some signet wants to do that, then\n\u003e why it is not pegged into testnet3? Then it would have as much chainwork\n\u003e protection as testnet3!\n\u003e\n\u003e It seems that testnet3 is good enough to represent the main chain during\n\u003e sidechain testing. It is permissionless and open, anyone can start mining\n\u003e sidechain blocks, anyone with a CPU can be lucky and find a block with the\n\u003e minimal difficulty. Also, because of blockstorms and regular chain reorgs,\n\u003e some extreme scenarios, like stealing all coins from some sidechain, can be\n\u003e tested in a public way, because that \"unfriendly and unstable\" environment\n\u003e can be used to test stronger attacks than in a typical chain.\n\u003e\n\u003e Putting that proposal into practice can be simple and require just\n\u003e creating one Taproot address per signet in testnet3. Then, it is possible\n\u003e to create one testnet transaction (every three months) that would move\n\u003e coins to and from testnet3, so the same coins could travel between many\n\u003e signets. New signets can be pegged in with 1:1 ratio, existing signets can\n\u003e be transformed into signet sidechains (the signet miners rule that chains,\n\u003e so they can enforce any transition rules they need).\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220305/b5cb634a/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "cd38505c35c1c43d0868a06327cfb69cda2c57bbcc43a13a638f13ae9752f9d2eb055d8d84641da8b458b0f456458dcbf9d004725856f733bdd386882de26a92"
}