Ark: An Alternative Privacy-preserving Second Layer Solution

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Ark v0.3 is released: https://github.com/ark-network/ark/releases/tag/v0.3.0

What's added:

VTXO tree signing: Trust between clients and the server for when completing a round is now removed. Round participants now collectively sign the VTXO tree after they've verified it.
A new on-boarding process is implemented, that allows users to on-board by simply sending their coins to an on-boarding address. (Pull request: https://github.com/ark-network/ark/pull/279)
Extended functionality: Developers are provided with enhances tools to build on Ark, any change produced by payments can be spendable without needing to claim it, allowing more efficiency and flexibility in off-chain transactions, and the system has become more robust with easy Bitcoin wallet restoration.

Let's see what the future of money holds.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Important announcements.

- Ark Labs closes a $2.5M pre-seed fundraise with the investor Tim Draper and his associates: https://blog.arklabs.to/ark-labs-secures-2-5-million-pre-seed-to-power-the-future-of-bitcoin-driven-global-commerce-9b5b19fe1a37. This will allow more people to work on Ark full-time. Soon, ArkLabs will post job openings. I'll let you know.
- Short video about the wallet software is out: https://x.com/ArkLabsHQ/status/1827013390134296723.

Cheap, private and fast off-chain transactions are the way to go. Cool

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Ark v0.2.0 is released: https://github.com/ark-network/ark/releases/tag/v0.2.0

In this release:

Wallet interface has a covenant-less implementation. That means it is now possible to send satoshis in Bitcoin networks, such as signet. (not mainnet, yet)
Offline payments are introduced. Sender co-signs the transaction with the ASP and delivers the payment request to receiver, whenever he (the receiver) comes back online. This is like your transaction being unconfirmed until you come back online.
MutinyNet support is added. Mutinynet is a custom Bitcoin signet, which has a 30-second block interval.

Yesterday, when testing v0.2.0 with one of their core contributors, I was able to receive 2000 signet sats off-chain, without making a single on-chain transaction.

Code:

$ ark balance
{
"offchain_balance": {
"details": [
{
"amount": 2000,
"expiry_time": "2024-08-22 23:04:26"
}
],
"next_expiration": "2024-08-22 23:04:26",
"total": 2000
},
"onchain_balance": {
"spendable_amount": 0
}
}

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

FAQ thread created: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-ark-faq-5505515

Discussions regarding the protocol should be better made there.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

A tweet from 2023 explains how Ark can work ~~non~~ less interactively without softfork: https://x.com/SomsenRuben/status/1681442410348576772.

In this write-up, he explains Ark in simpler terms: https://gist.github.com/RubenSomsen/a394beb1dea9e47e981216768e007454?permalink_comment_id=4633382#file-_simplest_ark-md. Once you read this, you can scroll down and read the second post, "Reducing Ark Interactivity Without Soft Fork".

Quote from: NotATether on June 13, 2024, 12:51:43 AM

But you know what would be really awesome? If there was a way to interact with the Ark network without having to run any sort of node. Just like how some wallets let you use LN via trampolines and submarine swaps.

This will be doable. Ark is just like lightning, with more burden placed on the ASPs, rather than the users. It's just a better tradeoff, IMO. Lightning will still be used for money transfer between the ASPs.

Kruw

member

Activity: 378

Merit: 93

Enable v2transport=1 and mempoolfullrbf=1

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 12, 2024, 02:45:58 AM

I think BIP-119 is the most popular covenant-proposal, but I'm not sure about its efficiency comparably to the rest.

I don't know which one is the safest and most efficient, but I've noticed people to propose enabling OP_CAT lately, which can incidentally allow covenants to be implemented: https://bitcoinops.org/en/newsletters/2022/05/18/#when-would-enabling-op-cat-allow-recursive-covenants. In Liquid, they've enabled OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK, which is said to be more efficient than OP_CTV: https://blog.blockstream.com/tapscript-new-opcodes-reduced-limits-and-covenants/.

Your insights would be appreciated.

I've been a supporter of CTV because I feel like I grasp the concept as a whole, but the emergence of competing proposals has made me hesitate. OP_CAT is mostly admired for its other capabilities since doing CAT covenants is a block space disaster. I have little knowledge of OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: https://brqgoo.medium.com/introducing-ark-v2-2e7ab378e87b

Ark v2 enables Ark Service Providers (ASPs) to reclaim their liquidity without having to wait for the expiration period (4 weeks) to elapse. It almost sounds too good to be true, ha?

Is this basically the only difference between v2 and v1?

So you can now basically stop an Ark node at any time you want.

But you know what would be really awesome? If there was a way to interact with the Ark network without having to run any sort of node. Just like how some wallets let you use LN via trampolines and submarine swaps.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: Kruw on June 12, 2024, 02:11:05 AM

There are a lot of covenant proposals, which one is the safest & most efficient?

I think BIP-119 is the most popular covenant-proposal, but I'm not sure about its efficiency comparably to the rest.

I don't know which one is the safest and most efficient, but I've noticed people to propose enabling OP_CAT lately, which can incidentally allow covenants to be implemented: https://bitcoinops.org/en/newsletters/2022/05/18/#when-would-enabling-op-cat-allow-recursive-covenants. In Liquid, they've enabled OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK, which is said to be more efficient than OP_CTV: https://blog.blockstream.com/tapscript-new-opcodes-reduced-limits-and-covenants/.

Your insights would be appreciated.

Kruw

member

Activity: 378

Merit: 93

Enable v2transport=1 and mempoolfullrbf=1

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 12, 2024, 01:45:29 AM

Covenants (when proposed).

There are a lot of covenant proposals, which one is the safest & most efficient?

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: Kruw on June 12, 2024, 01:21:31 AM

Which upcoming soft fork, exactly?

Covenants (when proposed).

Kruw

member

Activity: 378

Merit: 93

Enable v2transport=1 and mempoolfullrbf=1

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 11, 2024, 08:53:15 AM

so we better support the upcoming softfork.

Which upcoming soft fork, exactly?

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

One year after, let's see what has changed.

The Ark overview has now changed to the following link: https://arkdev.info/.
In June 4th (last week), Ark Labs launches to develop the very first Ark client: https://www.theblock.co/amp/post/298343/ark-labs-launch-bitcoin-layer-2-payments-network.
Ark v2 has been introduced: https://brqgoo.medium.com/introducing-ark-v2-2e7ab378e87b. I recommend you to read the previous introduction (v1) in here: https://brqgoo.medium.com/introducing-ark-6f87ae45e272.
Roadmap has been published: https://arkdev.info/docs/roadmap
A less technical explanation of Ark has been recorded in a BitDev conference: https://bitcointv.com/w/iSg88hQLVGKicujZQvvYc6.

If and when implemented via a softfork, covenants will enable non-interactive use of Ark, meaning users do not need to be online constantly to send and receive satoshis. However, Ark can also be implemented without covenants (cl-Ark), although it will require interactivity as an disadvantage, so we better support the upcoming softfork.

Kryptowerk

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1403

Disobey.

Quote from: Kryptowerk on May 30, 2023, 06:27:14 AM

As I understand this is currently in the very early concept stages or are there already first implementations running on testnet?

From the website: "Although Ark is a completely new design, it is interoperable with the Lightning Network, which complements it."
Why would it complement lightning and not - after a period of adoption of course - slowly make it obsolete?

Can anyone describe the up- and downsides in layman's terms?

I noticed there is another (few days older) thread on the same topic.
There is also a post answering my first question: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62333142

I'd suggest to close this topic and continue discussion in the other one.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: cryptosize on May 29, 2023, 12:27:10 PM

Oops, yet another red flag:

https://twitter.com/brqgoo/status/1661396918864424960

Roll Eyes

How is criticism of the LN and previously supporting big blocks a "red flag", as you put it?

I do share his criticism for LN inbound capacity, though, which I've previously ranted about here.

Kryptowerk

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1403

Disobey.

As I understand this is currently in the very early concept stages or are there already first implementations running on testnet?

From the website: "Although Ark is a completely new design, it is interoperable with the Lightning Network, which complements it."
Why would it complement lightning and not - after a period of adoption of course - slowly make it obsolete?

Can anyone describe the up- and downsides in layman's terms?

cryptosize

sr. member

Activity: 1666

Merit: 310

Oops, yet another red flag:

https://twitter.com/brqgoo/status/1661396918864424960

Roll Eyes

cryptosize

sr. member

Activity: 1666

Merit: 310

Quote from: paid2 on May 29, 2023, 11:14:49 AM

Quote from: cryptosize on May 28, 2023, 02:43:00 PM

I read some caveats about double-spending on their FAQ. Huh

Yeah you're right :

Quote

Users need to wait for on-chain confirmations to consider a payment ‘final’.

Seems strange, possibility of double-spending could be huge, but isn't it exactly the same process with LN ?

LN is prone to double-spending?

How so?

paid2

hero member

Activity: 504

Merit: 1065

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on May 27, 2023, 02:51:27 PM

What do you think.

I find the idea really interesting and good, and if I've understood it correctly it would make it possible to avoid providing liquidity as we do with LN?

On the other hand, the fact that there's no public code at the moment, and the lack of responsiveness from the team over the past week, leaves me sceptical as to whether they'll manage to find enough devs to contribute to the project.

Quote from: cryptosize on May 28, 2023, 02:43:00 PM

I read some caveats about double-spending on their FAQ. Huh

Yeah you're right :

Quote

Users need to wait for on-chain confirmations to consider a payment ‘final’.

Seems strange, possibility of double-spending could be huge, but isn't it exactly the same process with LN ?

cryptosize

sr. member

Activity: 1666

Merit: 310

The 1 million dollar question: does it have franky's Seal of Approval? Grin

On a serious note, I'm not sure I understood how it works... maybe someone needs to write an ELI5. Lightning is very simple to understand if you know how BGP routing works.

Is Ark centralized? I read some caveats about double-spending on their FAQ. Huh

Also, the fact they don't accept BTC donations via Ark is a bit worrying... it seems they don't trust it enough yet.

garlonicon

copper member

Activity: 821

Merit: 1992

Quote

Not really a downside as a "watchtower" program can be made that inputs your wallet password and the refreshing date in the future, which is stored with AES encryption in memory.

If you can use transaction locktime field or OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY/OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY, then it will be better. If not, then this is the proper way of doing that: https://gwern.net/self-decrypting

Topic: Ark: An Alternative Privacy-preserving Second Layer Solution (Read 724 times)