Topic: ⚛️ [ANN] Bitcoin Atom - Fork 1:1 of Bitcoin - Atomic Swap Powered ⚛️ (Read 54245 times)

I'm not sure we can compare Pancakeswap with Swaps. Having used the former -and I quite appreciate the importance to the ecosystem - the ingenuity of Swaps cannot be overlooked.

Sushiswap, Pancakeswap, Ape swap, Quick swap, Dogeswap, moonswap et Al only exists because Uni swap made the first move.

Still, I understand your point and get where you are driving at.

When it comes to countries that have banned or restricted certain cryptocurrencies, such as Japan, South Korea, China, and potentially Belgium, navigating government policies can be a significant challenge for users and developers alike. Here's how:

1. *Legality and compliance:* Users and developers must ensure that they comply with local laws and regulations to avoid legal consequences. This may mean that users in these countries are unable to buy, sell, or hold certain cryptocurrencies, and developers may need to adjust their products or services to comply with local regulations.

2. *Market access:* Countries that ban or restrict certain cryptocurrencies effectively remove a portion of the global market for these cryptocurrencies. This can lead to decreased adoption and liquidity, which in turn could impact the value and viability of these cryptocurrencies.

3. *Geographic arbitrage:* Despite bans or restrictions in some countries, users may still be able to access and trade certain cryptocurrencies through decentralized exchanges, peer-to-peer transactions, or by using VPNs or other methods to circumvent restrictions.

In countries where certain cryptocurrencies are banned or restricted, Swaps.org could potentially intervene by offering the following solutions:

1. *Decentralized exchange:* As a decentralized exchange, Swaps.org does not require users to register or provide KYC information, making it more accessible to users in countries with restrictive regulations. This allows users to trade cryptocurrencies without relying on centralized exchanges that may be subject to government oversight or control.

2. *Privacy-enhancing features:* If Swaps.org incorporates privacy-enhancing features such as ring signatures or zk-SNARKs, users may be able to obfuscate their transactions, making it more difficult for governments to identify or track their activity on the platform.

3. *Education and awareness:* Swaps.org could also play a role in educating users in banned countries about the risks and opportunities of decentralized cryptocurrencies, helping them make informed decisions about using these platforms despite local restrictions.

Overall, while Swaps.org cannot directly intervene in local regulations, it can provide users in banned countries with alternative means of accessing and trading cryptocurrencies, which could help promote the adoption and growth of decentralized finance in these regions. However, it's important for users to remain aware of the potential legal risks and to take steps to protect their privacy and security when using these platforms.

I agree with you on Pancakeswap and I appreciate the clarity on Swaps' niche product; cross-chain swaps. Looking at it from a new perspective, how does navigating government policies come into play for cryotocurrencies that are banned in specific countries. Like Japan/s.Korea and Monero (I think Belgium too, although not so sure)

Absolutely! DigiCash was a revolutionary digital cash system that was developed in the late 1980s by cryptographer David Chaum. Here are a few facts:

1. *History:* DigiCash was based on Chaum's research into secure electronic payments, and it used a blind signature system to prevent banks from tracking users' transactions.

2. *Anonymity:* DigiCash provided users with a high degree of anonymity, as it used unique "digital coins" that could be exchanged without revealing the identity of the sender or receiver.

3. *Impact:* Although it never gained widespread adoption, DigiCash is considered a precursor to modern cryptocurrencies and electronic payment systems. Chaum's ideas about privacy and decentralization influenced the development of Bitcoin and other digital currencies.

4. *Demise:* Despite initial interest from financial institutions, DigiCash struggled to gain traction and eventually went bankrupt in 1998. The reasons for its failure are debated, but many point to issues with scalability, adoption, and management.

Here are a few reasons why PancakeSwap and Swaps.org might not directly compete with each other:

1. *Different Networks:* PancakeSwap is primarily focused on Binance Smart Chain (BSC) and the BEP-20 standard, while Swaps.org will likely support a wider range of blockchains and tokens. This means that PancakeSwap's users may not be as interested in using a cross-chain exchange like Swaps.org.

2. *Target Audience:* PancakeSwap is primarily focused on the DeFi community, which is generally more interested in yield farming, staking, and other activities that are specific to BSC. Swaps.org, on the other hand, is targeting a broader audience of crypto traders and investors who want to make cross-chain swaps and potentially access a wider range of assets.

3. *Scalability:* PancakeSwap, being a DEX on BSC, benefits from the high speed and low fees of the Binance Smart Chain.

Let's explore the topic of centrality:

1. *Decentralization:* Both PancakeSwap and Swaps.org claim to be decentralized, meaning that they operate on a distributed network of nodes and are not controlled by any single entity. However, PancakeSwap's reliance on BSC could be seen as a potential point of centralization, as BSC is owned and operated by Binance, a large centralized exchange.

2. *Governance:* While both platforms claim to be decentralized, PancakeSwap's governance is more centralized than Swaps.org's. PancakeSwap's governance is controlled by the PancakeSwap team, which makes decisions about the platform's development and future direction. Swaps.org, on the other hand, may have a more community-driven approach to governance, which could provide greater transparency and accountability.

Here are a few key differences between Swaps.org and Uniswap:

1. *Blockchains:* Uniswap operates on the Ethereum blockchain, while Swaps.org is designed to support cross-chain swaps across multiple blockchains. This means that Uniswap is focused on ERC-20 tokens, while Swaps.org could potentially support a wider range of assets.

3. *Scalability:* Uniswap is constrained by the scalability issues of the Ethereum blockchain, which can lead to high gas fees and slower transaction times. Swaps.org could potentially provide more efficient and cost-effective transactions by leveraging the scalability features of different blockchains.

4. *Governance:* Uniswap has a decentralized governance structure, with a community-controlled development fund that provides funding for protocol improvements and initiatives.

From a centralization perspective, there are some interesting differences between Uniswap and Swaps.org:

1. *Ownership:* Uniswap is technically a decentralized protocol, but it's maintained and developed by a company called Uniswap Labs, which holds significant control over the protocol's development and direction. Swaps.org, on the other hand, could potentially be more community-driven and decentralized, with a governance structure that gives users more direct control over the platform's development.

2. *Dependence on Ethereum:* Uniswap is heavily dependent on the Ethereum blockchain, which could be seen as a potential point of centralization. If the Ethereum network faces scaling issues or other challenges, this could have a significant impact on Uniswap's functionality. Swaps.org's cross-chain approach could mitigate this risk by spreading transaction volume across multiple blockchains.

It's fair to say that, at least right now, Swaps.org doesn't have any direct competitors in the decentralized cross-chain exchange space. While other decentralized exchanges like Uniswap and PancakeSwap offer some of the same functionality, they're focused on specific blockchains or token standards, rather than providing a true cross-chain solution.

That said, the crypto space is notoriously dynamic, and it's possible that new competitors could emerge in the future. Swaps.org will need to continue innovating and building out its platform to maintain its early mover advantage and stay ahead of the competition.

True. I like to look at it this way:

Pancakeswap is the decentralized go-to for BEP-20 coins
Uniswap is the decentralized  go-to for ERC-20 coins

What is the decentralized go-to for cross-chain? Not sure I can name any. For the centralized counterpart, there are several exchanges that can act as competitons though.

With the pace at which the crypto market is growing, I agree with you wholeheartedly and would be surprised if Swaps is the only team working on this.

Before our eyes, we saw Digicash (for some of us old folks), a moment of silence, and then Bitcoin and all these.

Well, I suppose it depends on how you define competition.

In terms of a platform offering decentralized atomic swaps, Swaps.org may currently be unique in the space. However, the field of decentralized exchanges is rapidly evolving, and there may be other platforms in development that offer similar functionality.

It's also important to consider that decentralized exchanges and atomic swap technology are still in their early stages of development, and may not be as widely adopted as centralized exchanges. As such, the "competition" may be less about direct competitors and more about gaining market share and mindshare in the broader world of crypto.

I think the broader picture is that the cryptocurrency market is still relatively young and rapidly evolving. As new technologies and platforms emerge, there will be constant changes and shifts in the competitive landscape. The important thing is for projects like Swaps.org to stay ahead of the curve and continue to innovate, so they can capture a larger share of the market and bring decentralized atomic swaps to the mainstream. 👍

You're right about the potential benefits of Point Time-Locked Contracts (PTLCs) over Hashed Time-Locked Contracts (HTLCs) when it comes to preserving privacy in atomic swaps. Using adaptor signatures in the PTLC setup can help keep the pre-images (secret hashes) private until they're needed. If Swaps.org is using PTLCs for its atomic swap processes, it could provide greater assurance of privacy for users and their sensitive data.

*Point Time-Locked Contracts:* PTLCs are an evolution of HTLCs that allow for the same atomic swap functionality, but without the need to reveal the pre-image until the contract is actually settled. This means that if the contract is not settled, the pre-image remains private, which can help to protect sensitive information.

*Adaptor Signatures:* Adaptor signatures are an important component of PTLCs, as they allow one party to commit to a specific pre-image without revealing it to the other party. This means that the pre-image can be kept secret until the contract is settled, which improves privacy and security.

*Privacy-Focused Cryptocurrencies:* PTLCs could potentially be used to support atomic swaps between privacy-focused cryptocurrencies, such as Monero or Zcash, which use techniques like ring signatures and zero-knowledge proofs to maintain privacy. This could help to preserve the anonymity of users and their transactions even when using atomic swaps.

Not really my field, But i think PTLCs would be the way. It is better than HTLC when it comes to privacy, and is kinda more flexible. We have seen it work well on lightning Network. Hopefully, this works out too. This would make for a good discuss. Probably someone more informed can put me through (Wouldn't be bad to learn something new  )

Hmm. seeing this makes me wonder if Hashed Time-Locked Contracts or Point Time-Locked Contracts (adaptor signatures) are the tech in play here.

So, till now a bunch of questions about swaps and tecnology behind but lets move on to something more important. In order to run properly a pool i need to find some constants in the blockchain.cpp file for BCA. The thing is i only managed to find a couple of the in DEC  format which isnt a problem but the other ones are a bit difficult to find.

The red lines are easy to figure out but the one giving trouble are the blue ones. It would be awsome if you could point me in the right direction/file where i can find this info.

Hey Swaps Team, Is there like a competitor or sorts that I can check and compare the infrastructure of Swaps against?

You're not the only one eager to have those questions answered.

This is a very interesting one. I look forward to the responses.

How does Swaps.org handle the privacy and security of secret hashes (i.e., pre-images) in atomic swap processes, particularly when dealing with sensitive data or privacy-focused cryptocurrencies?

1. What are the key differences between hash-time locked contracts (HTLCs) and payment channels in the context of atomic swaps, and how does Swaps.org implement these technologies?
2. How does the platform handle fee calculations and rebalancing of liquidity pools in the context of atomic swaps, particularly in relation to fee splitting, slippage, and network congestion?

1. How does Swaps.org ensure compatibility with different blockchain protocols and smart contract standards (e.g., Ethereum's ERC20, Binance's BEP20, etc.)?
2. What scalability and performance trade-offs are involved in implementing atomic swaps on the blockchain, and how does Swaps.org balance these trade-offs?
3. Are there any potential limitations or drawbacks of using atomic swaps for cryptocurrency trading, particularly in terms of liquidity, security, or decentralization?

1. How does Swaps.org ensure that atomic swaps are executed efficiently and promptly, especially when dealing with large numbers of transactions or complex order types?
2. What steps are being taken to prevent failures or rollbacks during atomic swap processes, particularly in light of potential blockchain forks or network instability?
3. Are there any unique architectural or design considerations involved in building a DEX for atomic swaps that differ from traditional centralized or decentralized exchanges?

1. What programming languages and frameworks are used to build and maintain the platform, and how does the team ensure code quality and maintainability?
2. How does the platform handle liquidity pools and order books, particularly in terms of managing liquidity and preventing slippage?
3. Are there any unique challenges or considerations involved in building a DEX specifically for atomic swaps, as opposed to other types of decentralized trading platforms?

1. How does the platform handle user authentication and authorization, particularly in light of the decentralized nature of atomic swaps?
2. What measures are in place to prevent front-running or other forms of market manipulation on the platform?
3. How does Swaps.org ensure the privacy and confidentiality of user data, particularly in relation to atomic swaps and off-chain transactions?

1. How does Swaps.org handle order matching and settlement in a decentralized manner, particularly in terms of on-chain vs. off-chain processes?
2. What cryptography or consensus mechanisms are used to secure transactions on the platform, and what security audits have been conducted to verify the platform's code?
3. Are there any plans to integrate with layer-2 solutions or other scalability protocols to enhance the platform's performance and efficiency?