Hi Adam, That's a tricky issue you're trying to tackle.
>and/or use the blockchain for that function, but that is too slow and expensive, usually While perhaps not the most easy/practical path to take, it IS possible to create a custom blockchain for this specific purpose to use as a censorship-resistant data layer via Blind Merged Mining: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2019-December/017534.html Note that while it's not described in detail in my post, there is a (slightly suboptimal) way to do it without a soft fork. And here are more details about the perpetual one-way peg mechanism (needed to pay for fees without introducing speculation): https://medium.com/@RubenSomsen/21-million-bitcoins-to-rule-all-sidechains-the-perpetual-one-way-peg-96cb2f8ac302 Cheers, Ruben On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 1:59 PM AdamISZ via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> 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 >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
