TLDR: what exactly is needed for Grin to be easy to transferable and what is the ETA for that?

#1

OK, I have read a bit about Grin both here and on Keybase (also Discord and Telegram) and trying to understand one thing. No trolling, would appreciate honest answer.

  1. What is needed for Grin to be easily transferable for regular guy like me and for all the exchanges having the same way to send and recieve coins? In other words, what is missing for Grin to be usable from noobish users point of view? Is it the standarised TX thing that is mentioned in some places? We have some GUI wallets, so if the standarised TXs are implemented, then those wallets (and exchanges that want to have Grin) will implement it and everything will be fine or is something else needed?
  2. What is the ETA for easy transfers? I understand things might get postponed and there might be some issues on the way, but perhaps someone smarter than me could try estimating? Is it the next hard fork? Later? Earlier? Is harfork necessary?
#2

  1. We don’t really know.

  2. We definitely don’t know.

1 Like
#3

We have two scheduled hard forks left, July 15 2020, and Jan 15 2021. I would want to believe that we would have an acceptable, most likely not perfect, solution implemented at the latest in time for the latter.

#4

Thx! Could I ask further questions? Would really appreciate the answer.

  1. Is the “standarised TX” the thing we are looking for or is it not all that is needed?
  2. Does the change always require hardfork or is it possible to create such solution without the hardfork?
  3. I know Beam is a competitor, but there seems to be a bit of friendship between two projects, so what stops Grin from implementing Beam’s solution? I don’t understand the nature of it, but transferring beams is really easy for me. Can’t grin have exactly the same solution?
#5

You’re welcome!

  1. Not sure what you mean exactly, but a baseline transaction method that’s “good enough” for most (think 80%) use cases for users and services, would go along way to improve usability.
  2. It’s possible to introduce these changes without hard forks, but we’ve learned from our experience with v1.x → v2.0 that changes to transaction building will benefit from a clean… slate (sorry).
  3. It’s certainly an option, but comes with its own considerations. Part of Grin’s value proposition is scalability and simplicity. A solution like Beam’s can have a negative impact on both, alongside risks for DDoS/flooding attacks, and still have some usability issues (requiring users to be online within a certain interval). I’m personally open to consider similar executions, as long as it’s thoroughly researched and full circled.
4 Likes
#6

:joy: Funny, albeit not very helpful

#7

A laughter a day keeps Merlin’s beard away!

3 Likes