1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
|
Return-Path: <lee.chiffre@secmail.pro>
Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A64C016F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:53:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FA9A24FA8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:53:50 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id KD2STVGZRY0h
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:53:49 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from secmail.pro (secmail.pro [46.226.110.217])
by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8574B24F04
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:53:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by secmail.pro (Postfix, from userid 33)
id 13FA140EC8; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 02:46:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from secmailw453j7piv.onion (localhost [IPv6:::1])
by secmail.pro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32091192D684;
Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 127.0.0.1
(SquirrelMail authenticated user lee.chiffre@secmail.pro)
by giyzk7o6dcunb2ry.onion with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:46:41 -0700
Message-ID: <b8ed24fe87f391c5abf291ddc43de868.squirrel@giyzk7o6dcunb2ry.onion>
In-Reply-To: <5b77933071fa02e900183d8d5e24d866.squirrel@giyzk7o6dcunb2ry.onion>
References: <82d90d57-ad07-fc7d-4aca-2b227ac2068d@riseup.net>
<5b77933071fa02e900183d8d5e24d866.squirrel@giyzk7o6dcunb2ry.onion>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:46:41 -0700
From: "Mr. Lee Chiffre" <lee.chiffre@secmail.pro>
To: "Mr. Lee Chiffre" <lee.chiffre@secmail.pro>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 01:08:08 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Design for a CoinSwap implementation for
massively improving Bitcoin privacy and fungibility
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: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:53:50 -0000
> Coinjoin on Monero can be
> compared to ring signatures in Monero from the view of using decoys to
> help conceal the source. From this proposal is this to say that
> transactions will be at least 12 times larger in size to achieve the
> property of privacy that bitcoin is currently missing?
>
This was a typo. Coinjoin on BITCOIN, can be compared to ring signatures
in Monero form the view of using decoys to help conceal the source.
The same thing that makes monero transactions large and a scalability
concern is the same thing that bitcoin suffers from with using privacy
focused transactions.
|
