We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
7

The incompatibility comes down to 2 main factors: Pruning: an important addition of the mimblewimble proposal is the ability to merge transactions across blocks. If transactions include scripts, merging becomes impossible as the script behavior is unknown. While for simple spends, it's fairly straightforward to eliminate matching amounts. No address: in ...


6

Scripts are used in Bitcoin to prove authorization to spend the inputs in a transaction. Mimblewimble uses a quirk of CT such that only the owner of a set of inputs can create the transaction in the first place. The resulting transactions have enough structure that they can be merged and cut-through, and as @Matthieu says, after cut-through any scripts that ...


4

It is possible to create MW transactions interactively, and if you're creating multisignature outputs I think this is actually necessary. But ordinary transactions can be created non-interactively (well, with half a round of interaction, as in Bitcoin where one party sends an address to another party who builds a transaction) in two ways: Suppose the sender ...


3

MimbleWimble isn't fully implemented, so this answer may change as implementations mature and we gain a greater understanding of the design space. MimbleWimble transactions may be published to the network individually or combined with other transactions before being broadcast. For example, a user may choose to publish a new transaction on its own, or to mix ...


3

Commenting on the overall security model is a much more complex answer as many moving parts are involved, from initial blockchain syncing to cut-through. But to answer your specific questions: Quantum computing MimbleWimble is not very well prepared for quantum computing as it's intricately tied to Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC). But the full picture is ...


3

Yes -- although "without amounts or scripts" gives a clearer idea of what the transaction graph will look like: every output is a uniformly random curvepoint. This story is actually quite a bit better than Bitcoin where there are "addresses" which are often public and often reused. In general, finding a p2p layer that hides the original, unmerged ...


2

See this page of the wiki for a brief set of reasons: https://github.com/mimblewimble/docs/wiki/Monetary-Policy


2

Given the alleged goal of creating a politically independent means of value exchange, the fundamental differences between the projects are extremely dramatic. Grin has no investors, and every aspect of its development is voluntary, from the mathematics to the aesthetics. There is one paid developer who volunteered for the project and subsequently the ...


2

Range proofs for CTs demonstrate that output amounts are positive and within an allowable range, and that no inflation is occuring in a non-coinbase transaction. The range proofs (eg bulletproofs) are computationally binding. If the discrete log is broken, range proofs can be generated for values outside the correct range without any way to detect this. ...


1

BEAM had a private pre-sale, selling tokens to investors. They do not publish any of this information, but in their telegram and elsewhere there were estimates of 25 cents per token for a total of ~5 million dollars. They say on their site they did not do an ICO, when in fact they did do a private ICO, which are by definition less tranparent and fair than ...


1

There are many investors of this project. INVESTORS Lemniscap Investor of Beam Mimblewimble Node Capital is investor at BEAM Mimblewimble yeomans capital Investor of Beam Mimblewimble PROTOS asset management Investor of Beam Mimblewimble youbi capital Investor of Beam Mimblewimble Alternity is investor at BEAM Mimblewimble 1KX Investor of Beam ...


1

The only detailed comparison I could find was this: https://tlu.tarilabs.com/protocols/grin-beam-comparison/MainReport.html which is, if summarized (by a computer): In summary, Grin and BEAM are two open-source projects that are implementing the Mimblewimble block chain scheme. Each project does contain some unique functionality but as Grin's goal ...


1

From the website: Beam has a capped total supply, standing at 262,800,000 total coins. Our emission schedule is as follows: First year’s block reward is 80 coins per block Years 2,3,4 and 5 - 40 coins per block In years 6-9 the block reward is 25 coins. Afterwards, halving every four years until year 133, when emission stops In the first five years of ...


1

The proof of work is definitely not thrown away. All block headers need to be kept to prove the most work chain of headers. What is thrown away is what you would typically think as the content of the block: inputs and outputs. This works by keeping a current state tracking transaction outputs and various other bits of data and committing to all of that in ...


1

Understand that MimbleWimble/Grin is privacy centric. Does it use Zero Knowledge Proofs to achieve the privacy goals? Yes. Zero Knowledge Proofs (specifically, Range Proofs. Possibly Bulletproofs in the future) contribute to the privacy goals of Grin by giving validators the ability to verify that no inflation or deflation occured in a transaction without ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible