public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brad Morrison <bradmorrison@sonic.net>
To: vjudeu@gazeta.pl,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Future of the bitcoin-dev mailing list
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 05:50:51 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5d51234c0dd9b45cb3d86b69ea92c1e8@sonic.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <102858647-4a24d51eb95c76b443567edd0852c411@pmq6v.m5r2.onet>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3572 bytes --]

Hi all, 

It looks like there are only a few mailing lists left on
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo and all of the
remaining ones are using Mailman version 2.1.15, which is not the
current version - https://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/   

Was there any decision made on where to move the bitcoin-dev mailing
list to? 

Thanks, 

Brad

On 2023-11-11 02:54, vjudeu via bitcoin-dev wrote:

> What about using Signet, or some separate P2P network, to handle all of that? 
> 
> 1. All e-mails could be sent in a pure P2P way, just each "mailing list node" would receive it, and include to its mempool.
> 2. The inclusion of some message would be decided by signing a block. Moderators would pick the proper messages, and publish them by broadcasting a new block to all nodes.
> 3. Each message will be signed by some public key. It could be changed each time, or even derived from some HD wallet. Only those owning "master public keys" would know, which messages were sent by the same person.
> 4. The time of the block could be much longer than 10 minutes. It could be for example one hour, one day, or even longer. Or, the commitment to all of that could be just included "every sometimes" to the existing Signet chain, because it would take no additional on-chain bytes, and can be easily done in the coinbase transaction.
> 5. If there will be too much spam in the mempool, then hashcash-based Proof of Work can be used to filter messages. Instead of fee-based filtering, it could be Proof-of-Work-based filtering. Even better: because of "master public keys", the regular participants could be allowed anyway, without providing additional Proof of Work. Their signature would be sufficient in that case.
> 6. The code is almost there. Maybe there are even altcoins, designed specifically for storing data, and we could just use them?
> 7. This kind of decision would push things like Silent Payments forward. Because then, you could develop scanners, to know, who wrote which message. You could enter some "master public key", scan the whole chain, and find out all messages written by that particular participant.
> 8. It would push commitments forward. Because then, it would be possible to send some message to the "P2P mailing list network", and reveal it later. Of course, it is not mandatory to accept commitments at all, which means, they could be easily disabled, if they would be misused. Or we could start with no commitments, and introduce them later if needed.
> 9. Because Signet challenge can contain some multisig, or even some Taproot address, there will be no issue with using the same password to access the moderation panel. Also, in that case, it is possible to prove later, which moderator accepted which message. And also, it is still possible to use some shared key, if revealing that is not desirable, or even it is possible to easily reach "approved by all moderators" messages, because their Schnorr signatures could be combined. Also, any K-of-N multisig can be battle-tested in that way. 
> 
> So, I can see two options: reusing some existing P2P network, or making a new one, designed specifically for handling mailing list messages in a pure P2P way. I guess we can try some existing chains first, and if there is no promising altcoin, or if we don't want to be associated with any altcoin, then our own Signet-like network could solve it. 
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4448 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-04 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-11 10:54 [bitcoin-dev] Future of the bitcoin-dev mailing list vjudeu
2024-01-04 13:50 ` Brad Morrison [this message]
     [not found] <mailman.15.1699963203.5599.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
2023-11-14 12:32 ` Ali Sherief
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-11-07 15:37 Bryan Bishop
2023-11-07 16:12 ` Andrew Chow
2023-11-08  9:05   ` email
2023-11-07 17:03 ` Ademan
2023-11-07 18:14   ` Andrew Chow
2023-11-07 19:41     ` Christopher Allen
2023-11-07 22:24       ` Ryan Breen
2023-11-07 22:59       ` Peter Todd
2023-11-07 20:15     ` Ademan
2023-11-09  4:03     ` William Casarin
2023-11-07 23:07   ` Peter Todd
2023-11-07 17:48 ` Andreas Schildbach
2023-11-07 20:07 ` David A. Harding
2023-11-07 21:03   ` Keagan McClelland
2023-11-07 20:57 ` Tao Effect
2023-11-07 22:10 ` ponymontana
2023-11-07 23:08 ` Peter Todd
2023-11-08 14:29   ` Emil Pfeffer
2023-11-08  3:56 ` Anthony Towns
2023-11-13  2:58 ` Antoine Riard
2023-11-13 15:05 ` Overthefalls
2023-11-13 18:51   ` alicexbt
2023-11-14 15:32     ` Overthefalls

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5d51234c0dd9b45cb3d86b69ea92c1e8@sonic.net \
    --to=bradmorrison@sonic.net \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=vjudeu@gazeta.pl \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox