From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Uv6a7-0000yV-TC for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:01:51 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.215.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.177; envelope-from=adam.back@gmail.com; helo=mail-ea0-f177.google.com; Received: from mail-ea0-f177.google.com ([209.85.215.177]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Uv6a6-0004rj-0i for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:01:51 +0000 Received: by mail-ea0-f177.google.com with SMTP id j14so1477953eak.8 for ; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 07:01:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:user-agent:x-hashcash:x-hashcash; bh=htdqsrW4XQ/TrVIuHJmeZy7MOjYg4nsFrtBbB+YLgdI=; b=o7WiwZZVN4DqhQoGrwzefy53e5ujbCK3IluMwTa9ahusOEhV9Fk2h6Prt46ssSbjwE yImXx4Bcikj07JV076B5JVHUFQTxI99j8Pqr7VX5Plrpdh1RERKl9qF0kHrBrFRdxSE4 QjLXqKgOXaQcS7QGyXcLxoGo4Vn7SJm1LqrN+3ZDyDDTV7WsOCdWdhr9tqNVez0zD6a1 swPIbmxKx+wwBhVbPzTY6fSrhmV3U1kdVDCcaJe16+iu4ndj0j1x8VU3Nfkv55FyOM4A xurm8PpO95LSDW7lx84+k089pHnSulrBw+rpPOTv8y8/eZlfzfYaYRmdzDIc2sjeQswq y0tA== X-Received: by 10.14.3.73 with SMTP id 49mr12359497eeg.72.1373032903625; Fri, 05 Jul 2013 07:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from netbook (c83-90.i07-21.onvol.net. [92.251.83.90]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n5sm14174686eed.9.2013.07.05.07.01.41 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Jul 2013 07:01:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by netbook (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7703E2E05A0; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 16:01:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: by flare (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1000); Fri, 5 Jul 2013 16:01:40 +0200 Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 16:01:40 +0200 From: Adam Back To: Bitcoin-Dev Message-ID: <20130705140140.GA23949@netbook.cypherspace.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Hashcash: 1:20:130705:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net::BQhgJej/OATxi 4YM:000000000000000000000u13 X-Hashcash: 1:20:130705:adam@cypherspace.org::LyKxoPx+4ohFlgNn:00000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000Yr9 X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (adam.back[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1Uv6a6-0004rj-0i Subject: [Bitcoin-development] libzerocoin released, what about a zerocoin-only alt-coin with either-or mining X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:01:52 -0000 Hi I presume everyone saw the announce from Matthew Green & Ian Miers at JHU on the release of libzerocoin: https://github.com/Zerocoin/libzerocoin So now that raises the question of how can people experiment with real money with zerocoin. I think its fair to summarize there is resistance to merging into bitcoin as it slows validation, bloats the blockchain, and also a policy aspect it also imports cryptographic privacy into bitcoin. On the forum thread on zerocoin math etc I suggested maybe people interested to explore bitcoin could create an all-zerocoin alt-coin that is either-or mined and p2p exchangeable for bitcoin. Do people think that should work? It seems to me it should with minimal, bitcoin changes. I think the rule for either-or mining should be as simple as skipping the value / double-spend validation of the blocks that are zerocoin mining blocks. Obviously zerocoin blocks can themselves end up on forks, that get resolved, but that fork resolution can perhaps be shared? (Because the fork resolution is simply to accept the longest fork). > what about making an all zerocoin based alt-coin (no bitcoins, nothing but > zerocoins), that is either-or mined with bitcoin. Then people can trade > in and out of zerocoins by buying or selling them for bitcoin with an > atomic transaction, probably p2p without some trusted exchange like mtgox. > > Either-or mined (as distinct from merge-mined) I mean that each mined coin > set is either a set of 25 bitcoins or a set of 25 zerocoins. If its a > zerocoin set its not a valid bitcoin set, and if its a bitcoin its not a > valid zerocoin. I'm not sure the zerocoins or bitcoins have to do much > with mining events for the other network other than check they have the > expected number of bits as they wont automatically know how to validate > the other network. Some miners may choose to validate both networks, but > thats a choice for them. > > In that way people can experiment with zerocoin, without bloating the > block chain, complicating bitcoin, and without slowing validation on the > bitcoin network. And the two coins should have approximately the same > cost (and maybe therefore value, though the price would be subject to > demand/supply and any taint discount for bitcoins; zerocoins are taint > free, or perfectly blended taint at least). Adam