Rootstock: when? And possible impact?

[stdset]

Just in case if you don't know what is Rootstock:

RSK is the first open-source smart contract platform with a 2-way peg to Bitcoin that also rewards the Bitcoin miners via merge-mining, allowing them to actively participate in the Smart Contract revolution. RSK goal is to add value and functionality to the Bitcoin ecosystem by enabling smart-contracts, near instant payments and higher-scalability.
Bitcoin Friendly

We believe in Bitcoin. We support the Bitcoin community and we want to continue the legacy of Bitcoin´s pioneers. The lack of turing-complete smart-contracts capabilities may become an obstacle to Bitcoin´s growth to it´s full potential. RSK provides the missing technical needs, as a blockchain with a 2way peg to Bitcoin. As RSK does not mint, nor has pre-mined coins, then it has no speculative value and does not compete with Bitcoin.

http://www.rsk.co/

It's already several months since they started closed beta testing. In November they were talking about launching in May 2017 https://news.bitcoin.com/rsk-releases-turmeric-testnet/ that's quite soon.
Does anybody know, are they on schedule? What impact do you think their release will have on present difficult situation?

[d5000]

As far as I know, one of the difficulties of Rootstock is that there is an opcode missing in Bitcoin that could possibilitate two-way-pegs the way they want to realize it. The problem is that Bitcoin cannot verify the state of other blockchains, and so the "unlocking" of the BTC is currently not possible in a decentralized way. Maybe also malleability is a factor.

So Rootstock for now is forced to use a "semi-centralized model" with an organization ("federation") controlling the Bitcoins that are "locked" and "unlocked".

Because this solution is still too centralized to convince decentralization advocates, I think the impact of Rootstock will be limited until this problem is solved. But it's an extremely interesting project and I fully support it.

[Nomad88]

As far as I know, one of the difficulties of Rootstock is that there is an opcode missing in Bitcoin that could possibilitate two-way-pegs the way they want to realize it. The problem is that Bitcoin cannot verify the state of other blockchains, and so the "unlocking" of the BTC is currently not possible in a decentralized way. Maybe also malleability is a factor.

So Rootstock for now is forced to use a "semi-centralized model" with an organization ("federation") controlling the Bitcoins that are "locked" and "unlocked".

Because this solution is still too centralized to convince decentralization advocates, I think the impact of Rootstock will be limited until this problem is solved. But it's an extremely interesting project and I fully support it.

I have been working on sidechains and RSK for a few days now. It is an interesting information you shared there. Although it is quite old post, I still wanted to let you know that and say thanks. If you come back and see that, could you please tell us little more about "semi-centralized model" and if this is the model RSK planning to use in order to solve the BTC verification problem.

[SuperD007]

Wow this is very interesting indeed. I was not aware of this at all.

Thanks for sharing.....I really like the concept, hopefully, they can find a way to work around the semi centralization though.

[d5000]

If you come back and see that, could you please tell us little more about "semi-centralized model" and if this is the model RSK planning to use in order to solve the BTC verification problem.

In the "semi-centralized model" RSK planned to use, the Bitcoins that are locked to be converted in RSK tokens are sent to a multisig address. This address is controlled by a so-called "Federation". Most of the members of this federation are well-known Bitcoin companies. Each of the members control a key of the multisig address.

When a participant re-converts a RSK token into Bitcoins then the Federation nodes check if it's correctly "burnt" on the RSK sidechain. If a certain number of Federation members are able to verify this, then the Bitcoins are unlocked and sent to the participant.

At least that's how I understood it. It's basically the same model Blockstream uses for their sidechains.

RSK wanted to combine this mechanism in the future with Paul Sztorc's "Drivechain" mechanism, but that needs changes in the Bitcoin code.

[Nomad88]

If you come back and see that, could you please tell us little more about "semi-centralized model" and if this is the model RSK planning to use in order to solve the BTC verification problem.

In the "semi-centralized model" RSK planned to use, the Bitcoins that are locked to be converted in RSK tokens are sent to a multisig address. This address is controlled by a so-called "Federation". Most of the members of this federation are well-known Bitcoin companies. Each of the members control a key of the multisig address.

When a participant re-converts a RSK token into Bitcoins then the Federation nodes check if it's correctly "burnt" on the RSK sidechain. If a certain number of Federation members are able to verify this, then the Bitcoins are unlocked and sent to the participant.

At least that's how I understood it. It's basically the same model Blockstream uses for their sidechains.

RSK wanted to combine this mechanism in the future with Paul Sztorc's "Drivechain" mechanism, but that needs changes in the Bitcoin code.

I appreciate that thanks. So far, i see that there are come some codes making the sidechain projects difficult to implement. I am not really convinced about the efficency of "semi-centralized" solutions. I will read more about it and maybe stop buy to throw another question

[d5000]

So far, i see that there are come some codes making the sidechain projects difficult to implement.

Yep. If you want more information you can read these sources:

The Drivechain project - original documents by Paul Sztorc (good read!).

The Drivechain OP Code (general description of the needed opcode)

BIP R10 - Sergio Lerner's proposal for an opcode that counts "ACKs" from miners (in this proposal, the RSK sidechain would be merged-mined by the same miners that mine Bitcoin)

I am not really convinced about the efficency of "semi-centralized" solutions.

"Me too". There are lots of risks, including legal ones (for example, the "Federation" members could get sued for money laundering from a government [or multiple governments], and obliged to give out their keys). I really hope the Drivechain gets implemented, or they find another equivalent decentralized method.

[Zero1One0]

Thanks for the info everyone. I'll be watching developments for RSK closely and I hope this thread gets updated regularly as well.