[bisq-network/bisq] Investigations for a new trade protocol (#5430)

[chimp1984]

@MwithM 
> I'm not confident that CBDC will be good for Bisq, or for humanity in general

I think its not the question if we like it or not (and of course I also don't like it as its attached to much more suveillance power and control compared to cash or even banks), but to be able to deal with a reality which is very likely to happen, at least from the Chinese side (not so sure that EU/US will manage to deliver anything, hopefully not as those concepts sound much more dystopian). 

@flix1 
The general approach to separate the asset transfer with the secruity is a main goal of any new design for Bisq to me. Current Bisq code base is based on a single trade protocol and as we saw with attempts to get atomic swaps with BSQ implemented it's pretty difficult to combine that and would be even more to add more different trade protocols like atomic cross chain swaps. 
So to build the base architecture to decouple the trade protocol from the rest and support multiple protocols is a clear goal.
But before starting a new large effort we need to have at least 1 convincing new protocol approach to justify that effort. Also the fragmentation of markets and the mental costs to deal with multiple options where the user need to learn the security trade offs is a major issue.  
 

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/discussions/5430#discussioncomment-651322
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210423/2f3df020/attachment.htm>