[bitcoin-dev] Generalized sharding protocol for decentralized scaling without Miners owning our BTC

Paul Sztorc truthcoin at gmail.com
Tue Oct 10 15:09:21 UTC 2017


I think this response speaks for itself.

On 10/10/2017 10:09 AM, Tao Effect wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I thought it was clear, but apparently you are getting stuck on the
> semantics of the word "burn".
>
> The "burning" applies to the original coins you had.
>
> When you transfer them back, you get newly minted coins, equivalent to
> the amount you "burned" on the chain you're transferring from — as
> stated in the OP.
>
> If you don't like the word "burn", pick another one.
>
> --
> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
> sharing with the NSA.
>
>> On Oct 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin at gmail.com
>> <mailto:truthcoin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Haha, no. Because you "burned" the coins.
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2017 1:20 AM, "Tao Effect" <contact at taoeffect.com
>> <mailto:contact at taoeffect.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Paul,
>>
>>     It's a two-way peg.
>>
>>     There's nothing preventing transfers back to the main chain.
>>
>>     They work in the exact same manner.
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>     Greg
>>
>>     --
>>     Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also
>>     sharing with the NSA.
>>
>>>     On Oct 9, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Paul Sztorc <truthcoin at gmail.com
>>>     <mailto:truthcoin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     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
>>>     <mailto: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
>>>         <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>>>         https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>>         <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171010/0bebbbfd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list