Return-Path: <bitcoin-dev@lightco.in>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF14C002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:41:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8608541519
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:41:35 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 8608541519
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org;
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=lightco.in header.i=@lightco.in
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=Jd016lqw; 
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key,
 unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=ho2Zvo5n
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.8
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,
 SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id BpuyN1VW4mlE
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:41:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 512B1408F9
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.28])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 512B1408F9
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:41:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4585C016A
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 11:41:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap42 ([10.202.2.92])
 by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 11:41:33 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lightco.in; h=cc
 :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from
 :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:sender:subject
 :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1665502893; x=1665589293; bh=t6ydCYm6i0
 9DKXZJ++ppZTpCe/u367t27LdNpXtJUHw=; b=Jd016lqw1sr+mhXdtttwGAzf2g
 DsPiX5kTTY3eGZM7HXv3cmP661hocw+LA3livVfJc6QZOMudrC9IN2qrQijWZ07/
 n7ERmwCB9G5CMNZMEC14NwnvlVSJ6z5+BkrUlZwaYNjIRSJkgCbCkAe+aMHq+zbR
 VlnerjbB8qRyM9GzDD2JZJKbf8vLdYsHIFUlLuNdLKn69MK1Dlu8ZlIdN3AyZb6K
 GnaddcyFsDTRDQgY+Ob6MvG4kPWC2SxVOCnu9Bl12Qk9LXYu1TPYJaJKSdFeS+P8
 sobZ+XJ0jpEZv1/RNgz+XG8cJmfPzpLCZOYMQelrf+eGnqug4yOeC4u1vDGg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type
 :date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to
 :message-id:mime-version:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to
 :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=
 fm3; t=1665502893; x=1665589293; bh=t6ydCYm6i09DKXZJ++ppZTpCe/u3
 67t27LdNpXtJUHw=; b=ho2Zvo5nrRGMyvVA4VkJttGJmxWD1eTPl4qwzSmXrf8h
 36dd96ytrOWs6MoFAh3FhsYFhMKaPPLpmvqJGCMY7rZwZyThSRolVFtey8ud863o
 RjPR40WIrn4bnqWRMzCl3qonmkWGz/sh7engdKzU0XsB7EMKNdsE+Rxbz61x6Ehw
 NhTmfFEbbSaYsA+tqYz9+cMpRAjkO87EY1OME0vIaON6jmCggwXVxard46uk6l7D
 gOMI6Aav9CujoqHKsM9t6ThdhojO2PWc3zO0su3j0p8exfdZ+/mQN2C1QZCAi8AO
 fxlIlkawrHs2n6rqeeUswdolj2LVwAMNY4vD2uNdjA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:rY5FYw9ehWx5GR05q-hjDYNXpIna9yeaK2AEH7I46ytHx6d33UMXdg>
 <xme:rY5FY4uiFAfo2Kdw6bOk8a-r-uxh3dQVKJiEHBVMKKPY181Ck2laEpOHVfET4M51p
 2FV-4QKZ9rSaWJvTF4>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfeejiedgkeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfffhffvufgtgfesthhqre
 dtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdflohhhnhcunfhighhhthdfuceosghithgtohhinhdquggv
 vheslhhighhhthgtohdrihhnqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehgeduleeiveehiedthf
 ekleejhefgveduleeuffetvdevteeigeeukedtiefhveenucffohhmrghinhepsghithgt
 ohhinhhrohhllhhuphhsrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrg
 hmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepsghithgtohhinhdquggvvheslhhighhhthgtohdrihhn
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:rY5FY2BvVuf4LLrmIVd8bIwjbABUXn7xs5sOnAvidlZ1gC5hgilXuQ>
 <xmx:rY5FYwcYQVlKgfQl3w8DtUsISVoQmvKJCFGju0vSYUbCKsR12xedQw>
 <xmx:rY5FY1NJBfEmcGcOX3K1poCzrRbys9uxXRoQhX_kuHa6Wg8WIdrhDg>
 <xmx:rY5FY7bbF0j6P4SLqzZe4SnxIq8OSBylyIiyRr7bSlHQSjnrSTckEw>
Feedback-ID: ic4c14615:Fastmail
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501)
 id 2E85BBC0078; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 11:41:33 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-1015-gaf7d526680-fm-20220929.001-gaf7d5266
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <689ed481-e7eb-4fea-8ca7-578503f3f285@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 11:40:52 -0400
From: "John Light" <bitcoin-dev@lightco.in>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:52:10 +0000
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Validity Rollups on Bitcoin
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 15:41:35 -0000

Hi all,

Today I am publishing "Validity Rollups on Bitcoin", a report I produced=
 as part of the Human Rights Foundation's ZK-Rollup Research Fellowship.

Here's the preface:

> Ever since Satoshi Nakamoto first publicly announced bitcoin, its supp=
orters, critics, and skeptics alike have questioned how the protocol wou=
ld scale as usage increases over time. This question is more important t=
han ever today, as blocks are increasingly full or close to full of tran=
sactions. So-called "Layer 2" (L2) protocols such as the Lightning Netwo=
rk have been deployed to take some transaction volume "offchain" but eve=
n Lightning needs to use=C2=A0_some_=C2=A0bitcoin block space. It's clea=
r that as bitcoin is adopted by more and more of the world's population =
(human and machine alike!) more block space will be needed. Another thre=
ad of inquiry concerns whether bitcoin's limited scripting capabilities =
help or hinder its value as electronic cash. Researchers and inventors h=
ave shown that the electronic cash transactions first made possible by b=
itcoin could be given new form by improving transaction privacy, support=
ing new types of smart contracts, and even creating entirely new blockch=
ain-based assets.
>=20
> One of the results of the decade-plus research into scaling and expand=
ing the capabilities of blockchains such as bitcoin is the invention of =
the validity rollup. Given the observed benefits that validity rollups h=
ave for the blockchains that have already implemented them, attention no=
w turns to the question of whether they would be beneficial for bitcoin =
and existing bitcoin L2 protocols such as Lightning, too. We explore thi=
s question by examining validity rollups from several angles, including =
their history, how they work on a technical level, how they could be bui=
lt on bitcoin, and what the benefits, costs, and risks of building them =
on bitcoin might be. We conclude that validity rollups have the potentia=
l to improve the scalability, privacy, and programmability of bitcoin wi=
thout sacrificing bitcoin's core values or functionality as a peer-to-pe=
er electronic cash system. Given the "trustless" nature of validity roll=
ups as cryptographically-secured extensions of their parent chain, and g=
iven bitcoin's status as the most secure settlement layer, one could eve=
n say these protocols are a=C2=A0_perfect match_=C2=A0for one another.

You can find the full report here:

https://bitcoinrollups.org

Happy to receive any comments and answer any questions the bitcoin dev c=
ommunity may have about the report!

Best regards,
John Light