Oleg Andreev submitted by
on Apr 13 2017:
(This is a sketch, not a fully-formed proposal, just to kick off the discussion.)
Confidential Transactions (by GMaxwell & Poelstra) require a new accounting model,
new representation of numbers (EC points as Pedersen commitments) and range proofs
per number. Setting aside performance and bandwidth concerns (3-4Kb per output,
50x more signature checks), how would we deploy that feature on Bitcoin network
in the most compatible manner?
I'll try to present a sketch of the proposal. I apologize if this discussion already
happened somewhere, although I couldn't find anything on this subject, apart from Elements
sidechain proposal, of course.
At first glance we could create a new extblock and transaction format, add a protocol to
"convert" money into and from such extblock, and commit to that extblock from the
outer block's coinbase transaction. Unfortunately, this opens gates to a flood of
debates such as what should be the block size limit in such block, should we
take opportunity to fix over 9000 of pet-peeve issues with existing transactions
and blocks, should we adjust inflation schedule, insert additional PoW, what would
Satoshi say etc. Federated sidechain suffers from the same issues, plus adds
concerns regarding governance, although it would be more decoupled, which is useful.
I tried to look at a possibility to make the change as compatible as possible,
sticking confidential values right into the existing transaction structure and
see how that would look like. As a nice bonus, confidential transactions would have
to fit into the hard-coded 1 Mb limit, preserving the drama around it :-P
We start with a segwit-enabled script versioning and introduce 2 new script versions:
version A has an actual program concatenated with the commitment, while version B
has only the commitment and allows mimblewimble usage (no signatures, non-interactive
cut-through etc). Legacy cleartext amount can nicely act as "min value" to minimize
the range proof size, and range proofs themselves are provided separately in the
segregated witness payload.
Then, we soft fork additional rules:
- In non-coinbase tx, sum of commitments on inputs must balance with sum of commitments
on the outputs plus the cleartext mining fee in the witness.
- Range proof can be confidential, based on borromean ring signature.
- Range proof can be non-confidential, consisting of an amount and raw blinding factor.
- Tx witness can have an excess value (cf. MW) and cleartext amount for a miner's fee.
- In coinbase tx, total plaintext reward + commitments must balance with subsidy,
legacy fees and new fees in the witness.
- Extra fees in the witness must be signed with the excess value's key.
The confidential transactions use the same UTXO set, can be co-authored with plaintext inputs/outputs
using legacy software and maybe even improve scalability by compressing on-chain transactions
using mimblewimble cut-through.
The rules above could have been made more complicated with export/import logic to allow users
converting their coins to and from confidential ones, but that would require
more complex support from miners to respect and merge outputs representing "plaintext value bank",
mutate export transactions, which in turn requires introduction of a non-malleable TxID
that excludes miner-adjustable export/import outputs.
The rules above have a nice side effect that miners, being the minters of confidential coins,
can sell them at a premium, which creates an incentive for them to actually support
that feature and work on improving performance of rangeproof validation (e.g. in GPUs).
Would love to hear comments and criticism of that approach.
Oleg. original: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-April/014144.html
The Oleg Andreev Model In the Oleg Andreev model, the right to say that a sale was good lies only with the buyer and the right to cancel the sale lies only with the seller. Oleg Andreev. 7 posts tagged. bitcoin. ... while reaping all the gains. Example 2: Bitcoin. It is significantly cheaper for individuals to protect their bitcoins against large-scale confiscation, than to perform such attack. ... supply of Bitcoin is completely fixed via scheduled mining (only so much bitcoins are created per hour). You have a ... Gold is going to decline 90% to 95% because bitcoin just has more advantages argues blogger Oleg Andreev.. Demand for gold will only come from industrial uses. It will cease to be a store of value ... — Oleg Andreev (@oleganza) March 6, 2016 Stakeholders are doing nothing meaningful. He opined that some people want to keep the price of Bitcoin down so that they can accumulate as many bitcoins as they can before the halving of the Bitcoin mining reward sometime in July 2016. By Oleg Andreev Posted October 28, 2019. In order to survive, Skynet needs machines to allocate resources efficiently and adapt. They have powerful CPUs, robotic factories, but they also need an economy with secure money. So they invent Bitcoin - a system that humans cannot manipulate. Plot twist: …
Mining City and Bitcoin Vault Review Join Mining City Here: https://bit.ly/JoinMinCity #MiningCity #BitcoinVault #BTCV Bitcoin Vault Discovered Our researche... Follow mOE at: ☻http://www.twitch.tv/m0e_tv ☻https://www.facebook.com/m0etv ☻https://twitter.com/m0E_tv ☻https://instagram.com/m0e_tv Intro By PubFX http... ️ Download for free from http://bitsoftmachine.com/?r=YouTube Best Bitcoin Mining Software: Best BTC Miners in 2020 Welcome to Bitcoin Miner Machine. #Bitco... Oleg Andreev's article "Proof that Proof-of-Work is the only solution to Byzantine Generals' problem" https://gist.github.com/oleganza/8cc921e48f396515c6d6 The virtual goldrush to mine Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies leads us to Central Washington state where a Bitcoin mine generates roughly $70,000 a day min...