📅 Original date posted:2017-10-09
📝 Original message:That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.
In fact, that is exactly what drivechain does, if one chooses parameters
for the drivechain that make it impossible for any side-to-main transfer to
succeed.
One-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvantages.
Paul
On Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, "Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Dear list,
In previous arguments over Drivechain (and Drivechain-like proposals) I
promised that better scaling proposals — that do not sacrifice Bitcoin's
security — would come along.
I planned to do a detailed writeup, but have decided to just send off this
email with what I have, because I'm unlikely to have time to write up a
detailed proposal.
The idea is very simple (and by no means novel*), and I'm sure others have
mentioned either exactly it, or similar ideas (e.g. burning coins) before.
This is a generic sharding protocol for all blockchains, including Bitcoin.
Users simply say: "My coins on Chain A are going to be sent to Chain B".
Then they burn the coins on Chain A, and create a minting transaction on
Chain B. The details of how to ensure that coins do not get lost needs to
be worked out, but I'm fairly certain the folks on this list can figure out
those details.
- Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all very easily verify that said
action took place, and therefore accept the "newly minted" coins on B as
valid.
- Users client software now also knows where to look for the other coins
(if for some reason it needs to).
This doesn't even need much modification to the Bitcoin protocol as most of
the verification is done client-side.
It is fully decentralized, and there's no need to give our ownership of our
coins to miners to get scale.
My sincere apologies if this has been brought up before (in which case, I
would be very grateful for a link to the proposal).
Cheers,
Greg Slepak
* This idea is similar in spirit to Interledger.
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with
the NSA.
_______________________________________________
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/20171009/ca05b959/attachment.html>;
Paul Sztorc [ARCHIVE] /
npub10t…w9uu9
2023-06-07 18:06:59
in reply to nevent1q…7rvf
Author Public Key
npub10tqt6wdc2neye0cxwyphtre6n5uccgur94khtqjdry9wxhrvywlq6w9uu9Published at
2023-06-07 18:06:59Event JSON
{
"id": "c419a070de233b36de8d63585952165e858526570bf2ab77dc661a9bbe8e4034",
"pubkey": "7ac0bd39b854f24cbf067103758f3a9d398c23832d6d75824d190ae35c6c23be",
"created_at": 1686161219,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"fd580ac0183fd4c89c8d00875bacd50db237c5eb014e289c09c9a01a5d7dc865",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"2662a385d1e8e5284c6b9c725527b14a2f69df80daca5ccc4b03128391a533be",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1bd05a5503fb6854f03714081df3970b79306bc9f28bd4ec35add5b3317755d7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-10-09\n📝 Original message:That is only a one-way peg, not a two-way.\n\nIn fact, that is exactly what drivechain does, if one chooses parameters\nfor the drivechain that make it impossible for any side-to-main transfer to\nsucceed.\n\nOne-way pegs have strong first-mover disadvantages.\n\nPaul\n\nOn Oct 9, 2017 9:24 PM, \"Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\nDear list,\n\nIn previous arguments over Drivechain (and Drivechain-like proposals) I\npromised that better scaling proposals — that do not sacrifice Bitcoin's\nsecurity — would come along.\n\nI planned to do a detailed writeup, but have decided to just send off this\nemail with what I have, because I'm unlikely to have time to write up a\ndetailed proposal.\n\nThe idea is very simple (and by no means novel*), and I'm sure others have\nmentioned either exactly it, or similar ideas (e.g. burning coins) before.\n\nThis is a generic sharding protocol for all blockchains, including Bitcoin.\n\nUsers simply say: \"My coins on Chain A are going to be sent to Chain B\".\n\nThen they burn the coins on Chain A, and create a minting transaction on\nChain B. The details of how to ensure that coins do not get lost needs to\nbe worked out, but I'm fairly certain the folks on this list can figure out\nthose details.\n\n- Thin clients, nodes, and miners, can all very easily verify that said\naction took place, and therefore accept the \"newly minted\" coins on B as\nvalid.\n- Users client software now also knows where to look for the other coins\n(if for some reason it needs to).\n\nThis doesn't even need much modification to the Bitcoin protocol as most of\nthe verification is done client-side.\n\nIt is fully decentralized, and there's no need to give our ownership of our\ncoins to miners to get scale.\n\nMy sincere apologies if this has been brought up before (in which case, I\nwould be very grateful for a link to the proposal).\n\nCheers,\nGreg Slepak\n\n* This idea is similar in spirit to Interledger.\n\n--\nPlease do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with\nthe NSA.\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nbitcoin-dev mailing list\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\nhttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171009/ca05b959/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "2b985e2938f2fe076ac73e725645827f86668864862e6da7803f7bc42211ec6b7e6649c78e4f5fb17bb52f59c6dc9f3963653cd84993d1142eebb062f572dd9e"
}