Tale of Two Coins - Reading Assignment

Read this pre-mainnet primer on MimbleWimble, Grin and Beam. Answer the questions and post your answers below:

Questions:

  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
    a. Funding
    b. Governance
    c. Target Customer
    d. Emission Schedules

  2. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?

  1. Grin relies on internal funding and donations, is community-driven, is aimed at tech people and has an unfixed monetary policy, with a new token issued every second. Beam on the other hand was structured using VC funding, is more business oriented, has a corporate structure, aims at mass adoption (even for non expert users) and has a fixed issuance schedule (similar to BTC).
  2. They both aim to join transactions together to make them indecipherable through the MimbleWimble protocol, offering a safer and more scalable solution.

1.Grin followes a highly principled, cypherpunk ideology is community driven – including no token premine or ICO, as well as volunteer-based development – Beam sought VC funding and hired a team of developers, is more business oriented. Differences in the design choices hint that while Grin maintains an emphasis on community-driven decentralization, Beam stands out for its sharper business sense and aims for mass adoption

2.Both cryptocurrency projects have plans to implement new and experimental features. both teams currently implement a privacy feature named Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks

1 Like
  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…

  2. Funding

GRIN’s Funding: Donations
BEAM’s Funding: Startup Company funding

  1. Governance

GRIN’s Governance: Relying on community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the Monero Project
BEAM’s Governance: Corporate Structure like Zcash

  1. Target Customer

GRIN’s Target Customer: Technical Crowd
BEAM’s Target Customer: Non-Technical People

  1. Emission Schedules

GRIN’s Emission Schedules: A new token is issued every second, this is due to the project’s belief that sustained issuance will stabilize the value of the currency
BEAM’s Emission Schedules:Fixed issuance schedule akin to Bitcoin

  1. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?

May potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to teh designs failure to conceal inputs and outputs – are also under discussion. They will undergo regular system-wide software updates, or hard forks, in their early days.

1 Like
  1. a. Grin: No outside funding, only donations. Beam: VC Funding
    b. Grin: Open source and community driven. Beam: corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.
    c. Grin: More directed to people with technical knowledge. Beam: user friendly
    d. Grin: Unfixed. One token every second. Beam: Fixed issuance, similar to bitcoin

2.What the designs have in common is their basis in the privacy-oriented protocol, Mimblewimble.

1 Like
  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
    a. Funding
  • Grin: based on donations

  • Beam: funded through part of block rewards and VC funding

b. Governance

  • Grin: community driven, no organisation

  • Beam: corporate structure

c. Target Customer

  • Grin: targets technical users
  • Beam: goes for mainstream adoption

d. Emission Schedules

  • Grin: infinite supply, one coin per second

  • Beam: fixed supply

  1. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
    They don’t conceal inputs and outputs, they implemented Dandelion.
1 Like
  1. Funding, G: volunteer based, B: VC Funding
    Governance, G: community based model, B: corporate structure, foundation
    Target customer, G: for people looking for a currency, B: for people interested in a store of value asset
    Emission schedules, Both aims to launch their Mainers (first step)

  2. Vulnerability to machine-learning analysis. So they regularly undergo system-wide software upgrade.

1 Like
  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
    1. Funding
    2. Governance
    3. Target Customer
    4. Emission Schedules
Grin Beam
Funding Volunteer based development; no premine, no ico. VC funded, dedicated team of developers
Governance Relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project; while it’s a less reliable income source, Grin sees this as an advantage that ultimately increases the security of the project. For example, Beam takes its example from privacy-centric cryptocurrency zcash, maintaining a corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.
Target Customer Technical users only, with command line wallet As much users as possible to increase adoption and anonymity set, through a friendly graphical user interface wallet.
Emission Schedules Aims to be a currency, monetary policy is unfixed: new token is issued every second. Aims to be a store of value like bitcoin, and has a similar issuance policy.
  1. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
    • They both may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. They implement Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks.
1 Like

1-

a. Grin followed a highly principled, cypherpunk ideology – including no token premine or ICO, as well as volunteer-based development – Beam sought VC funding and hired a team of developers to work on the software full-time, allowing it to speed ahead of Grin in its implementation. “Grin is structured as a research project. They do not receive any outside funding except for donations, they do it part-time, they’re doing it very slowly,” Romanov said.

b. Grin takes a different approach, relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project. And while it’s a less reliable income source, Grin sees this as an advantage that ultimately increases the security of the project.
Beam takes its example from privacy-centric cryptocurrency zcash, maintaining a corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.

c.Beam has a heavy emphasis on usability, having built a simple wallet interface that is considered central to the project’s overall value-add.In addition to being designed from a user-friendly perspective, the wallet boasts implementations in different operating systems, including MacOS, Windows, and Linux. Beam will also release a light client alongside its mainnet release.
Grin, however, currently only offers a command-line wallet, and is less accessible for non-technical users.

d. For both cryptocurrencies, the launch of their mainnets represents only the first step. Both cryptocurrency projects have plans to implement new and experimental features. For example, Beam cited its plans to integrate with BOLT, the privacy-centric lightning implementation, as well as adding atomic swaps and other features.Yeastplume from Grin cited “tentative plans for enhancements,” while Peverell from beam said that “we have tons of improvements in usability, scalability and privacy in mind.”

2- Concerns that both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. They implement Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks.

1 Like
  1. a. GRIN fund from community donations (like Monero), BEAM fund from block reward (like Zcash)
    b. GRIN is open-source and community-driven, BEAM have a Foundation company
    c. GRIN 1st target geek and tech savvy to grow as a “research project”, BEAM targets 1st on fast adoption trough GUI usability for fast increase of anonymity set
    d. GRIN “a new token is issued every second.”, BEAM sees itself as a “store of value” coin that has a fixed issuance schedule like bitcoin.
  2. Both GRIN and BEAM focus on implementation of “Mimblewimble, CT is not much more than bitcoin with throw-away public addresses plus hidden transaction amounts”
    The key concern is external traceability and linking "concerns that both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs "
    “both teams currently implement a privacy feature named Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks, there may be other experimental efforts that can be concluded as well going forward”
1 Like

a. Funding
Grin: based on donations
Beam: funded through part of block rewards and VC funding

b. Governance
Grin: community driven, no organisation
Beam: corporate structure

c. Target Customer
Grin: targets technical users
Beam: goes for mainstream adoption

d. Emission Schedules
Grin: infinite supply, one coin per second
Beam: fixed supply

  1. They both may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis. They implement Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks.
1 Like

1a. grin is community funded, by donations. beam is more "professional, more business oriented with vc funding. beam stands out foor its biz sense and seeks wider adoption
1b.both intend to implement new features and continue to develop. both will use dandelion
1c grin is targeting more techies, beam, more mass adoption
1d., beam fixed supply, grim infinite supply, 1 grim per second
2. both use mimble wimble, both aim for more private and scalable solution

1 Like
Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
Grin Beam
Funding Donation, volunteer Private from VC, portion of block rewards
Governance Community driven Corporate
Target Customer Technical, researchers; command line wallet Average consumer with pretty UIs, mobile wallet, and multiple OS support
Emission Schedule Inflationary at stable rate (1/sec); encourage spending as currency Limited similar to Bitcoin; store of value
What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?

Both protocols do not conceal inputs or outputs, only masking their connections using MimbleWimble. This makes them vulnerable to timing attacks. They employ Dandylion to make it harder for attackers to monitor the network to sniff out individual transactions before they are aggregated together in MimbleWimble.

EDIT: the article listed after it is also interesting. It’s basically a continuation of the assignment article, talking about the privacy issues of GRIN/BEAM

1 Like
  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
  • Grin
    a. Funding: donations.
    b. Governance: cypherpunk ideology, volunteer-base development, simmilar to Monero.
    c. Target Customer: technical users, only CLI for the moment.
    d. Emission Schedules: one new token each second.

  • Beam:
    a. Funding: VC funding and % of block reward.
    b. Governance: corporate structure, similar to Zcash.
    c. Target Customer: usability, with a GUI and mobile wallet.
    d. Emission Schedules: fixed emission.

  1. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
    Machine learning analysis due to a design´s failure to conceal inputs and outputs, so both are implementing Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks.

Thanks for the article, good find! :+1:

  1. a+b grin relies on community funding, beam was structured by vc funding,has a corporate structure and aims at mass adopion
    b.grim more tech community, beam more mass adoption
    c. both have no pre-mine and fixed issuance schedule
  2. both use mimble wimble protocol
1 Like

Funding

Grin does not receive outside funding except for donations and relies on volunteer-based development.

Beam sought VC funding and hired a team of developers to work on the software full-time

Governance

Grin is open-source, relying on community funding similar to monero, does not engage in ICO, pre-mine, founder’s rewards, or similar activities.

Beam maintains a corporate structure, funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support development.

Target Customer

Grin only offers a command-line wallet and is more geared to technical users.

Beam has a user-friendly perspective, having built a simple GUI wallet interface and mobile wallet, and supports different operating systems.

Emission Schedules

Grin has unfixed issuance - new tokens are generated every second, considered more of a currency than a store of value.

Beam has a fixed issuance schedule similar to bitcoin and considers it a store of value.

  1. A well-connected sniffer node can sit on either side of the CoinJoin and link as a peer and pick out how transactions move. (est. 96% of transaction sender and receiver addresses were identified this way in the grin blockchain.)
    Beam hopes to integrate with BOLT and adding atomic swaps, etc. and both also implement Dandylion.
1 Like
  • Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
    a. Funding
    Grin - relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project.
    Beam - funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.

b. Governance
Grin-open-source and community-driven by design.
Beam- takes its example from privacy-centric cryptocurrency zcash, maintaining a corporate structure.

c. Target Customer
Beam has a heavy emphasis on usability, having built a simple wallet interface that is considered central to the project’s overall value-add.
Grin, only offers a command-line wallet, and is less accessible for non-technical users.

d. Emission Schedules
Beam sees itself as a “store of value” .
Grin sees itself as a currency, not a ‘store of value’.

  • What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
    concerns that both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs .
1 Like

1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
a. Funding
Grin simply relied on donations and volunteer-based development; whereas, Beam sought venture capital funding to hire full-time developers.

b. Governance
Beam applied a corporate structure (similar to Zcash) with portions of the block reward allocated to a foundation. Staying true to the cypherpunk ethos, Grin utilized the community-funding model (similar to Monero).

c. Target Customer
Grin’s audience consists of techy “OG” crypto enthusiasts; whereas, Beam appeals most to average crypto users and investors.

d. Emission Schedules
Beam’s emission schedule will resemble Bitcoin with a fixed emission. Grin currently emits 1 Grin per second with the official emission remaining unfixed.

2. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
The key privacy concern of both lies in their wide-open inputs and outputs. They implemented Dandelion to temporarily deal with this.

  1. Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…

  2. Funding
    GRIN: volunter-based development.
    BEAM: VC funding.

  3. Governance
    BEAM: maintaining a corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.
    GRIN: relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project.

  4. Target Customer
    BEAM: non-technical users. More broader audience.
    GRIN: for more technical users.

  5. Emission Schedules
    BEAM: fixed supply. Meant to be a store of value (like BTC).
    GRIN: non-fixed supply. Meant to be a currency.

  6. What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
    Potential vulnerability against machine-learning analysis. To deal with this both projects want to implement Dandelion.

1 Like