Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 14:43:53 +0000
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <jMANAdspMdPb1ZCFttQ3tGmkZ0oYojLY5Oz1d8ZSNl3JhZeDuT1xK0vxTu8uyHcgPXWsM_6XNb3R9tVD3_Yez88pviFrCaNt7LPqdWVBWus=@protonmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] PathCoin
Precedence: list

Hello list,

I took the time to write up this rather out-there idea:

Imagine you wanted to send a coin just like email, i.e. just transfer data =
to the counterparty.

Clearly this is in general entirely impossible; but with what restrictions =
and assumptions could you create a toy version of it?

See this gist for a detailed build up of the idea:

https://gist.github.com/AdamISZ/b462838cbc8cc06aae0c15610502e4da

Basically: using signature adaptors and CTV or a similar covenant, you coul=
d create a fully trustless transfer of control of a utxo from one party to =
another with no interaction with the rest of the group, at the time of tran=
sfer (modulo of course lots and lots of one-time setup).

The limitations are extreme and as you'd imagine. In the gist I feel like I=
 got round one of them, but not the others.

(I very briefly mention comparison to e.g. statechains or payment pools; th=
ey are making other tradeoffs against the 'digital cash' type of goal. Ther=
e is no claim that this 'pathcoin' idea is even viable yet, let alone bette=
r than those ideas).

Publishing this because I feel like it's the kind of thing imaginative mind=
s like the ones here, may be able to develop further. Possibly!


waxwing / AdamISZ