Return-Path: Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E5DC0052 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D23D8708A for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B+Ks0Jx1C9kg for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail2.protonmail.ch (mail2.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.22]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5631187069 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:18 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1606134260; bh=4MJbquz+wFGYJfjkHzwc1PkV6t7hg0ZplW/KN1JCV0Q=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=mZjH4JB2CF329RyeKA2kAoGN5ZuIHELN4hw3BUH/etKvmpS+WbX66nmGOfcgIK9jG orJZO1uUXhoYDM9CjoJvliWCAbNB6tITQyYj9/CnhcdXejrYu2D72Epe89qTEa9Az7 bVKhNQJH0YfQj/oJvJ70eSAFq0ysLcx4yYfs3h/I= To: AdamISZ , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: AdamISZ Reply-To: AdamISZ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:59:09 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bulletin boards without selective censorability for bitcoin fungibility markets 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, 23 Nov 2020 12:24:24 -0000 =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 On Monday, 23 November 2020 00:40, AdamISZ via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Canvassing opinions/critiques from those working on bitcoin and related p= rotocols. > > See the attached gist for a write-up of an outline of an idea, which is c= onceived for joinmarket but can apply in other scenarios where there is mar= ket for liquidity and in which privacy is a very high priority (hence 'bitc= oin fungibility markets' can certainly include coinswap along with coinjoin= , but possibly other things): > > https://gist.github.com/AdamISZ/b52704905cdd914ec9dac9fc52b621d6 Greg Maxwell pointed out to me on IRC that this idea doesn't work: there is= only a receipt on the commitment to the offer (message) from the maker, no= t on the plaintext version, hence there is nothing stopping the maker from = falsely claiming censorship after not sending the plaintext. Reflecting on this a bit more, my intuition is that this problem is much mo= re difficult than I had hoped; if there is a solution I suspect it involves= much more sophisticated ideas. Many solutions just end up begging the ques= tion by presuming the existence of an uncensorable BB in order to create a = new one; and/or use the blockchain for that function, but that is too slow = and expensive, usually. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, though :) waxwing