Quote from: Odalv on June 27, 2015, 05:12:22 PM

Quote from: justusranvier on June 27, 2015, 04:58:09 PM

Quote from: Peter R on June 27, 2015, 04:35:12 PM

I read that comment and thought the same thing.

I think it would be a tragedy for them to miss that lesson, and then lose the ability to make beneficial contributions to Bitcoin in the future.

I'd love to see the blinded output amounts from Confidential Transactions make it into Bitcoin, but I don't think their current approach to this debate is a viable way of ensuring they'll be in a position to advocate for that in the future.

I would afraid to have CT on main chain.
There may be bug (or luck to find some number) and then creating bitcoins out of nothing. And nobody can verify.

This might be relevant. It's posted in altcoins. But still...

Quote from: gmaxwell on June 28, 2015, 03:31:54 AM

Quote from: dnaleor on June 09, 2015, 01:15:44 PM

(1) people who send BTC in the "ring signature sidechain" (RSSC), taint their BTC who are not entering the RSSC. If their identity is matched with the same identity as who put BTC in the RSSC, this person can become "flagged".

No, it's possible to trustlessly coinswap in and out of such a system, with no detectable connectivity. And there are many reasons to use such a sidechain, such as improved smart contracting. I consider improved fungiblity to be an essential basic feature.

Unfortunately, it's appears that it isn't possible to trustlessly swap in and out of monero because the developers of bytecoin didn't carry across smart contract functionality which they didn't understand. Perhaps the capability could be added later.