Author Topic: My opinion on why Stealth, Backups and Sidechains should not be added  (Read 17164 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chris4210

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
  • Keep Building!
    • View Profile
    • www.payger.com
  • BitShares: chris4210
That is an inspiring discussion and many great idears are poping up! Short note from my side.

Quote
We are talking with a couple of retails chains (+40,000 supermarkets) and they are very concert about the data security, ownership and transparency. The are looking for a cheaper and faster payment rail network. BitShares with their DEX could be a good option for them. However lets say we have MC Donalds and BurgerKing on the Platform, both companies want to keep their daily transactions cloacked. Nobody wants to be analyized by their direct competitors! One option would be permission and permission less ledgers, but since BitShares is a open payment network stealth transactions are elematary for our future growth.

With stealth in place we can do both. Show all transaction in public or hide certain transactions.

Talking about the future roadmap:

In my effort to desing the new BitShares.org website I also saved most of the future features that we would like to see at BitShares. Please check here. I am talking with some graphic guys to get the design for the site down.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xw4o-99EXCPg301mzE6CCm6XOOHGqVVfpeQiWilZkXM/edit

Roadmap items on the bottom. I plan to add them all on the new website.
Vote Chris4210 for Committee Member http://bit.ly/1WKC03B! | www.Payger.com - Payments + Messenger | www.BitShareshub.io - Community based fanpage for the BitShares Blockchain

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
Great questions, those and many more will be answered in time once we get the details hammered down, job descrip and milestones defined.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

tarantulaz

  • Guest
regarding sidechain, I feel  what you said is that we haven't found a secure solution for that, but not "we should not add".

sidechain will help a lot, assuming it is robust/secure enough,  it can make the inter chain value transfer more convenient. and then will be no need to have various kind of  BTCs and ETHs in DEX.

Ethereum now have the BTCrelay, we also need similar feature.

we do not have to set BTC and ETH also collateral, if it is not risk free.

maybe we haven't got an acceptable solution for this, but we need to find such a solution

I mentioned that in some of my recent comments in this post. I agree that there might be a secure implementation and I made clear that I disagreed with the one currently proposed by BM. However... Regardless of how secure that implementation is, one vulnurability, one bug, and we are done...
I mentioned many times the Multigateway of NXT/SuperNET, but nobody seems to have approached them.

Also, if we build our DEX appropriately and add all the good trading features, think of how many more startups and blockchain companies would like to use BitShares. It doesn't have to be us that will build this really expensive and potentially dangerous feature. You go from the bottom to the top, not the other way round. In the end, Ronny might be able to do the sidechain with his 'DC' or some other company/individual, and earn fees from the FBA.

@arhag Would Stealth benefit from the use of Schnorr Signatures in any way?
Anyone think this route would be better than going with CN, CT, CCT, ZKT, etc?

A Schnorr signature by itself doesn't get you any privacy benefits that a ring signature (or Zerocash's complicated zkSNARKs) would give you. It is just another way to do signatures as an alternative to the ECDSA that is currently used in BitShares (and Bitcoin and most other altcoins). Now I do think a Schnorr signature is better (for example it very nicely allows for arbitrarily large efficient threshold signatures). And I would very much love to see BitShares eventually use EdDSA. But that is sort of unrelated to the topic at hand.

Did you say you had a cryptography guy helping you with this process? Because if you want to build something that goes beyond simply implementing a GUI for the existing blinded transfer feature, then that is really important.

Yes, and yes.
For Stealth to be the "killer app" for anon and untrace tho we have to choose the right components here, think about the nsa and other orgs that may hate this kind of technology, those are the things I want to solve, or at least as close as what avail tech has to offer.

I am still anxiously waiting for the final announcement. I would like some of this things to be included in your announcement.

What will happen in case that the community is against that proposal?
Do you have just one variation or have you got different potential implementations that could be added?
How big is your team of cryptographers and what are some of their previous projects that they were involved in and why did you chose them?
How much is the total cost?
How do you plan to cover the GUI costs?
Why do you think that optional privacy is any good at all? It has been pointed out many times by many, that not having the whole chain private is really bad for the privacy of those who try to stay private. http://weuse.cash/2016/06/09/btc-xmr-zcash/ this is a very good article that explains everything.
Will on chain backups be necessary in order to make sure?
Who is going to be the escrow in the asset sale?
How will ensure that nothing is going to go wrong and in case something does go wrong what are you going to do? What are you going to do if the chain is denonymised? Who is going to fund the development to fix it?

By the way what is the IPFS that you keep mentioning?

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
@arhag Would Stealth benefit from the use of Schnorr Signatures in any way?
Anyone think this route would be better than going with CN, CT, CCT, ZKT, etc?

A Schnorr signature by itself doesn't get you any privacy benefits that a ring signature (or Zerocash's complicated zkSNARKs) would give you. It is just another way to do signatures as an alternative to the ECDSA that is currently used in BitShares (and Bitcoin and most other altcoins). Now I do think a Schnorr signature is better (for example it very nicely allows for arbitrarily large efficient threshold signatures). And I would very much love to see BitShares eventually use EdDSA. But that is sort of unrelated to the topic at hand.

Did you say you had a cryptography guy helping you with this process? Because if you want to build something that goes beyond simply implementing a GUI for the existing blinded transfer feature, then that is really important.

Yes, and yes.
For Stealth to be the "killer app" for anon and untrace tho we have to choose the right components here, think about the nsa and other orgs that may hate this kind of technology, those are the things I want to solve, or at least as close as what avail tech has to offer.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
regarding sidechain, I feel  what you said is that we haven't found a secure solution for that, but not "we should not add".

sidechain will help a lot, assuming it is robust/secure enough,  it can make the inter chain value transfer more convenient. and then will be no need to have various kind of  BTCs and ETHs in DEX.

Ethereum now have the BTCrelay, we also need similar feature.

we do not have to set BTC and ETH also collateral, if it is not risk free.

maybe we haven't got an acceptable solution for this, but we need to find such a solution
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
@arhag Would Stealth benefit from the use of Schnorr Signatures in any way?
Anyone think this route would be better than going with CN, CT, CCT, ZKT, etc?

A Schnorr signature by itself doesn't get you any privacy benefits that a ring signature (or Zerocash's complicated zkSNARKs) would give you. It is just another way to do signatures as an alternative to the ECDSA that is currently used in BitShares (and Bitcoin and most other altcoins). Now I do think a Schnorr signature is better (for example it very nicely allows for arbitrarily large efficient threshold signatures). And I would very much love to see BitShares eventually use EdDSA. But that is sort of unrelated to the topic at hand.

Did you say you had a cryptography guy helping you with this process? Because if you want to build something that goes beyond simply implementing a GUI for the existing blinded transfer feature, then that is really important.

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
@arhag Would Stealth benefit from the use of Schnorr Signatures in any way?
Anyone think this route would be better than going with CN, CT, CCT, ZKT, etc?
Remember, if Stealth is totally anonymous and untraceable, choosing the right path now (and for the next 5+ years) is imperative.
edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnorr_signature
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
I like this idea...wont be easy......but I believe is a pretty rasonable path.
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
 +5% +5%
BitShares Munich is definitely consider this.
It's too bad an FBA reqiuires a hard fork though, can't we soften that? I foresee many companies wanting to "go public" in this way. We are building so many products now that it only makes sense.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline EstefanTT

We would just have to create a long list of everything we dream of and decide by priority to arrange them in the list. Then, the more money we have the more features we can add.

Metatrader API, new GUI and other cool thing we don't expect until a long time.

The main thing is find a way to explain how the FBA can be very valuable for someone buying in the ICO. The % of fees ... forever unless someone want to sell their FBA and probably get their money back (or more). Explain that with all theses new features, BitShares will compete with the big players and the FBA is a way to invest in this very crucial step and have a income from several features on BitShares and bla bla bla ...
I think the effect would be double. People finding this ICO would invest not only in the ICO but also in BTS. It makes more sense. So BTS should rise if the ICO is a success.
So the ICO should also describe how far we are at the moment and the capabilities of BTS as it is now.

FBA have been created exactely for that purpose, let's get the more of it !

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 04:53:58 pm by EstefanTT »
Bit20, the cryptocurrency index fund http://www.bittwenty.com
(BitShares French ConneXion - www.bitsharesfcx.com)

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise

I would like to see Rate limited fees, Autobridging, Maker/Taker, Negative Fees, Smartcoin Park rates, Bond Market, MetaTrader Integration, Trading Bots first and then Stealth and possibly sidechains.  I made this post to say why I don't want them, but if the community thinks it is fine to add them and everyone agrees then I will step back and I will still join the coin offering. I would also like to see improvements on the voting mechanisms based on the Dash voting model and I definitely want to see contracts being implemented.
We need to act soon. Waves are a direct competitors, of unknown quality, however they have 16MUSD and they can definitely learn from the past mistakes of each crypto... For the features I mentioned we need about 300.000$ to 500.000$, if we consider the work needed to be done on the GUI.

 +5% +5% +5%
First STEALTH FBA offering, then Worker to fund the ICO offering, then milestone-projects for all of our top requests. Once that third step is reached we will run a Poll to find out which features to knock out first. I'll put the Poll on steemit.com too of course.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
Maybe I missunderstood how FBA works. I had in mind that when you own an FBA you have a % of each Tx fee from the feature you paid for.

As an example, if someone would fund stealth, he would benefit from each Tx fee on stealth transfer (ex : 20% for BTS / 80% for him )Besides having his FBA worth its speculative value from the market and beeing able to sell it anytime.


Exactly, if we sell off some of the STEALTH FBA, then those Stealth holders will get rewarded for every token they hold, for every stealth transaction that is processed, by everyone interacting with our chain.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise

What if Bts Munich (or anyone wanting to step up) set up a worker of 3-5k (tiny sum, would be voted for sure) to pay for expenses to set up a ICO campain to sell a global FBA that would support development for blinded Tx, Stealth, bond market, rate limitex fee ... ).

Now this idea I like. I could use the worker to set everything up rather quickly too, I can get quite a bit done with just minimal capital.
 

Bitshares Munich seem to be able to do A LOT with small funds. We don't need to gather millions.

You just made my day with that comment, thank you Estefan :)
 

We would have an ICO with goals, a simple list of features by money gathered.
ICO : 50k > blinded Tx and rate limited Tx
ICO : 100k > + stealth
ICO : 150k > + bond market
... and so on.

As you guys already know, I milestone every job I undertake so this is a given. We would not need that much money though, but I see how we could break all of this up into an ongoing milestones-project. Don't forget recurring/scheduled payments, margin trading and lots of tools for pro-traders, enough to snag them away from the likes of polo, thinkorswim, etc.
 

With the right campain, it would be easy to collect 500k. Ppl nowadays jumps on any ICO that looks promising. Besides the FBA token would be tradable right after the ICO, it's a fast way to make money if the FBA token increase in value after the ICO (for a investor perspective)
The other benefit is this campain would get the attention on BitShares, on FBA (very good thing) and finally ppl would expect the market cap to grow in response of amazing features added (this expetation would  increase the market cap).

 +5% +5% chris and rodrigo are handling all of the financials and legal stuff. we're on it.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

tarantulaz

  • Guest
My idea was to try to have the funds to develop all features included in on only FBA.
As we can't know how much funds we would collect, I was thinking of doing it with milestone. Every X thousands $ we add one feature that have fees with one that don't but increase the overall value of BitShares anyway.

I keep thinking if it's well done, we could easily collect what we need to allow BitShares to take off soon. We will be  have all these features one day but the big question is ... will it be too late ?

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

I see. I think the milestones can be added via BlockTrades and Openledger, in the form of escrow. As I said earlier, we needed a detailed roadmap + timeline, with fund allocation (how much we are going to spent, on what, for how long and who is going to work on these things). We also need to have some excess funds and set some time breathing room i.e 2-3 extra months.

For example : We publish our roadmap and start the ICO. Openledger, Blocktrades + a few more people do the escrow for us. We hardfork after the ICO is over and we transfer the shares to that committee account.

We could either give BitShares to the participants straight away or a BitShares IOU. Why an IOU? Because not all funds are going to be spent and the escrow will still exist, people will be able to exchange their IOUs for BitShares gradually. For example if the roadmap states that the developement is going to last for a year, then people will be receiving BTS over that period. So even if the development stops (I hope it doesn't), for any reason, then at least people can get their BTC back.

This is just an idea. I bet there are many things that we could improve to make it work and get people to join. The CO has to happen and I guess it will happen one way or another. We might have to do stealth first, implement it successfully and then people might be more willing to get in a bigger CO (even if I wouldn't prefer a smaller and then a bigger CO).

I would like to see Rate limited fees, Autobridging, Maker/Taker, Negative Fees, Smartcoin Park rates, Bond Market, MetaTrader Integration, Trading Bots first and then Stealth and possibly sidechains.  I made this post to say why I don't want them, but if the community thinks it is fine to add them and everyone agrees then I will step back and I will still join the coin offering. I would also like to see improvements on the voting mechanisms based on the Dash voting model and I definitely want to see contracts being implemented.

We need to act soon. Waves are a direct competitors, of unknown quality, however they have 16MUSD and they can definitely learn from the past mistakes of each crypto... For the features I mentioned we need about 300.000$ to 500.000$, if we consider the work needed to be done on the GUI.

If we haven't done all this in the next 1 to 1.5 years, then I am afraid we are done...

Offline EstefanTT

My idea was to try to have the funds to develop all features included in on only FBA.
As we can't know how much funds we would collect, I was thinking of doing it with milestone. Every X thousands $ we add one feature that have fees with one that don't but increase the overall value of BitShares anyway.

I keep thinking if it's well done, we could easily collect what we need to allow BitShares to take off soon. We will be  have all these features one day but the big question is ... will it be too late ?

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Bit20, the cryptocurrency index fund http://www.bittwenty.com
(BitShares French ConneXion - www.bitsharesfcx.com)