Should Dash add MWEB?

Should Dash add MWEB?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 66.7%
  • No

    Votes: 2 33.3%

  • Total voters
    6

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,320
1,400
1,183
MNOs have overwhelmingly voted in favor of keeping CoinJoin. Now we need to find out if we want to improve on our privacy tools by adding MimbleWimble Extension Blocks, as adopted by Litecoin. This finger-in-the-air poll and discussion might set in motion a proposal to inform DCG of our wishes. A DCG implementation would not require heavy R&D as all the heavy lifting has been done by MWEB's lead developer, David Burkett. Both Dash and Litecoin are UTXO chains, making porting relatively uncomplicated.

Note, MimbleWimble is not just a privacy feature, it is also a scaling solution, a stripped down blockchain with the absolute minimum of data.

How it Works: Mimblewimb
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3 and Dans

Dans

New Member
Oct 3, 2020
35
36
18
47
I came here many years ago for four reasons that I couldn't find in other places:

1-speed
2-Cheap commissions
3-Possibility of stacking
4-Optional privacy

Anything that improves any of the four previous points will have my approval as long as it does not give up the decentralized essence of Dash and does not interfere with the other three points.

I think that what you bring to the table today should at least be considered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

qwizzie

Grizzled Member
Aug 6, 2014
2,019
1,201
1,183
MNOs have overwhelmingly voted in favor of keeping CoinJoin. Now we need to find out if we want to improve on our privacy tools by adding MimbleWimble Extension Blocks, as adopted by Litecoin.
There are still 4 weeks of voting to go. The Governance proposal in question has a two month time period, not one month time period.
Maybe we should first await the final results of the Governance proposal ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,320
1,400
1,183
I understand, though I can't imagine much changing unless something significant happens, and that might be a good thing. We shall see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

xkcd

Active Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Feb 19, 2017
464
435
133
australia
mnowatch.org
Dash Address
XpoZXRfr2iFxWhfRSAK3j1jww9xd4tJVez
Yes, provided we can still audit the coin supply, ie there are no inflation bugs. Given that Litecoin has already implemented it, then I think this problem is already solved or impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vazaki3

qwizzie

Grizzled Member
Aug 6, 2014
2,019
1,201
1,183
I wonder how MimbleWimble regarding block compression compares to DIP 25 (https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/announcing-dip-25-compressed-block-headers.53431/)
Would it not make DIP 25 redundant or can DIP 25 coexist with MimbleWimble ?

Scalability
Transaction “cut-through” has been mentioned as an integral part of the Mimblewimble protocol. In the Bitcoin network, a block consists of hundreds of transactions and other information that must be stored on the blockchain. Mimblewimble compresses these blocks with a “cut-through”, a feature whereby large amounts of this information are partitioned and removed from the block without risk to blockchain security.

See also this : https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/mimblewimble.11043/#post-105614

I did not see an objection from UdjinM6 (Dash Core lead developer) with regards to MimbleWimble, he just linked to a video that described Mimblewimble.
Comments in that dash.org/forum thread seem to indicate MimbleWimble could coexist with and improve on our CoinJoin implementation and that it could work through a sidechain (or perhaps through Platform, as that is basically a sidechain).

We will need some feedback from a developer if MimbleWimble can (from a technical point of view) be implemented in our Dash PoW & Proof of Service & upcoming Dash Platform system.

Or you can just launch a Governance proposal for 1 dash and see the response of the developers through comments on Dash Central.
You could even launch a 'Discussion' proposal for 1 dash, make clear to everyone this is for discussion only (so voting is not the objective), and gather feedback from MNO's through their comments on Dash Central.

I voted yes on your poll by the way.
 
Last edited:

GrandMasterDash

Grizzled Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Jul 12, 2015
3,320
1,400
1,183
We will need some feedback from a developer if MimbleWimble can (from a technical point of view) be implemented in our Dash PoW & Proof of Service & upcoming Dash Platform system.
Yes, agree, ideally we need dev feedback.

I'm not entirely sure how Litecoin implemented MW but in a normal MW block there are no public keys or individual transaction values, the block really is stripped down to the bare minimum, perhaps 1/10th the size of a bitcoin transaction. And then on top of that, the chain can be constantly pruned.

Transactions are signed back and forth between the two parties.. that is to say:
- the person receiving signs the senders "invoice"
- it is sent back to the sender
- the sender signs and broadcasts the results to the network.

You can't just randomly receive money without signing the "invoice" (which is kind of cool). Well you can, but it would require additionally mechanisms and it looks like MWEB is using some kind of stealth address.

The value stored in each block is the sum of all transactions for that block, expressed as a Pedersen Commitment, a kind of CoinJoin with range proofs to make sure the values are positive. All the keys for the transactions are stored locally client side. If you delete the wallet file, you can restore your account from the seed but there would be no transaction history, only your final balance.

The design is super elegant but keep in mind I am definitely not an expert is such things!
 
Last edited: