From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9FA9C002D for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D733861034 for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.298 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mbvzvmnTex0c for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-40137.protonmail.ch (mail-40137.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.137]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 054F760B5B for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:38 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail2; t=1652700408; x=1652959608; bh=gJc8Nt3IYYJc2n+1T/1idJ4fUUuNwzRtfH6IALfvqqI=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID; b=OPXcfctQqCJvEP9BVo+AzV3gmTvMZS5aFuFprRQ2Jzi1cZTBt/rKiazJr3d7OThOq wQKBwSth1s3nADyEEiV4zcScwgx+pZfxB9UiqiCh93PZN2wqpUE8+SoCfUNjCN5uJC f7v4Z+3pMCTlJcPhbueMPHh+ij8lV4wW4jeptVv0swiIFExMWGG9Pyk0OGNhTRGZxn VOwwJFLQPKBYT6dD7KKbRAYie47E0jH93SZOBJVYnGz3rqeo+TQlnhqVYuPoxj7gu/ 1pZfv4zizDY7kQ1HFRTHuvk2x3efLPF78H9dpIk+eco6m9eRpzSQe8kf7Sy7RWJQym 4MOCUI4m5F7rw== To: Chris Belcher , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <21c0cdea-f929-b9a8-baa6-e33eb2cee80f@riseup.net> References: <21c0cdea-f929-b9a8-baa6-e33eb2cee80f@riseup.net> Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Improving chaumian ecash and sidechains with fidelity bond federations X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 11:26:51 -0000 Good morning Chris, > I don't know yet exactly the details of how such a scheme would work, > maybe something like each fidelity bond owner creates a key in the > multisig scheme, and transaction fees from the sidechain or ecash server > are divided amongst the fidelity bonds in proportion to their fidelity > bond value. Such a scheme would probably look a little like my old ideas about "mainsta= ke", where you lock up funds on the mainchain and use that as your right to= construct new sidechain blocks, with your share of the sideblocks proporti= onal to the value of the mainstake you locked up. Of note is that it need not operate as a sidechain or chaumian bank, anythi= ng that requires a federation can use this scheme as well. For instance, statechains are effectively federation-guarded CoinPools, and= could use a similar scheme for selecting federation members. Smart contracts unchained can also have users be guided by fidelity bonds i= n order to select federation members. Regards, ZmnSCPxj