-
Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
-
Funding- Beam used VC funding for its coin development, whereas Grin rely on community donations.
-
Governance -Beam maintains a corporate structure and funnel a portion of the block reward to support the block chain development. Grin relies on community funding.
-
Target Customer – Beam offers a more user-friendly user wallet, whereas Grin targets the technical user.
-
Emission Schedules- Beam is a more store of value coin, with fixed issuance. Grin’s issuance is undetermined, their intent is to be a currency and not a store of value…
-
What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this? Both coins are vulnerable to machine-learning analysis due to a design failure to conceal inputs and outputs. They hope to deal with this vulnerability with system upgrades and hard forks.
. Differences:
Funding. Grin : volunteer work and donations (Moreno model). Beam : block rewards (Zcash model).
Governance. Grin : decentralized. Beam : centralized.
Target customer. Grin : niche tech oriented people. Beam : mainstream.
Émission schedule. Grin : inflationist. Beam : fixed supply.
. Key concern: as the inputs and outputs are not hidden, patterns could be extracted by ML. The use of Dandelion will help prevent that by « shuffling » these patterns.
- GRIN vs BEAM:
GRIN: funding through Donations
BEAM: funding via startup company
GRIN: governance- community funding model
BEAM: governance- corporate structure (Zcash)
GRIN- technical crowd (Target market)
BEAM-Non-technical people ^
Emission Schedule: GRIN-new token every second
BEAM- fixed issuance schedule
2.Do not conceal inputs or outputs, use Dandelion to fix this.
- Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
Funding
Governance
Target Customer
Emission Schedules
- What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
1.Beam is VC funded and has a dedicated team of developers. Grin operates with volunteer based development
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. Grin takes a different approach, relying on a community funding model.
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, however, currently only offers a command-line wallet, and is less accessible for non-technical users.
Beam sees itself as a “store of value” coin that has a fixed issuance schedule similar to bitcoin.
Grin’s monetary policy is unfixed with one coin issued each second.
They don’t conceal inputs and outputs, they implemented Dandelion.
1.-
BEAM:
a. Through block rewards.
b. A corporate structure.
c. Mass adoption.
d. Fixed supply.
GRIN:
a. Community funded.
b. More community-driven.
c. Tech people.
d. New token every second, unlimited supply.
2.- Inputs and outputs are not hidden, so patterns could be analyzed by ML. They are using dandelion to deal with this issue.
- Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
a. Funding: Grin relies on community funding similarly as Monero, while Beam takes funding from block rewards.
b. Governance: Grin is more community driven while Beam is more corporate structured.
c. Target Customer: Grin is more oriented to technical users while Beam puts emphasis on general public usability.
d. Emission Schedules: Grin’s issuance is unfixed, they want it to be like a currency. On the other hand, Beam’s issuance is fixed, targeting a store of value. - What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
Vulnerability to Machine Learning Analysis. Dandelion’s implementation should help to deal with this.
1.1. Grin: community funded and volunteers, Beam: VC + block rewards funded and dedicated developers
1.2. Grin: community governance, Beam: Run like a company
1.3. Grin: technical users, Beam: everyone
1.4. Grin: unlimited + new token issued every second, Beam: limited supply
2. inputs & outputs not concealed
a. The difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s Funding:
Grin is structured as a research project, and does not receive any outside funding except for donations. Beam’s finding on the other hand maintains a corporate structure, and funnels a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s further development.
b. The difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s Governance:
Grin has a firm commitment to not engage in any ICO, pre-mine, founder’s rewards, or similar activities. In addition, they are not driven by profit or corporate interests,and are open-source and community-driven by design; similar to Monero. Whereas, Beam takes its example from privacy-centric cryptocurrency zcash, and is a professional effort to create a privacy coin, by which there is an alignment of incentives within the block rewards so that the project won’t die.
c. The difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s Target Customer:
Grin is still very much aimed at a technical crowd, and will be very much ‘use at your own risk’, especially in the early days. Hence, it currently only offers a command-line wallet, and is less accessible for non-technical users. Beam has a heavy emphasis on usability, having built a simple wallet interface that is considered central to the project’s overall value-add. Beam envisions that having a GUI wallet and mobile wallet will increase adoption, increase number of transactions and usage and will thus increase the anonymity set.
d. The difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s Emission Schedules:
Grin’s monetary policy is unfixed. Currently, a new token is issued every second indefinitely. This is due to the project’s belief that sustained issuance will stabilize the value of the currency. The Grin Team wish it to be a currency, not a ‘store of value’ and want to encourage use. In contrast, Beam sees itself as a “store of value” coin that has a fixed issuance schedule akin to bitcoin. The Beam Team wanted to create a confidential store of value coin, with the emission to be limited.
2. The key privacy concern of both implementations is that they may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. To deal with this concern, both projects implement a privacy feature named Dandelion to better conceal these potential leaks. Additionally, there may be other experimental efforts that can be concluded as well going forward.
-
Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
-Funding:volunteer based/no premise vs. VC funding
-Governance: community vs corporate structure
-Target Customer: tech crowd vs general audience
-Emission Schedules:sustained per second vs fixed deflationary -
What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
MimbleWimble fails to conceal inputs and outputs which lends itself to machine learning…intend to implement dandelion
1a. GRIN: Part-time, no outside funding except donations, slow research-like project. BEAM: Portion of the block reward goes to the foundation.
1b. GRIN: Community-funding; it has a Monero-like governance. BEAM: Professional, corporate effort to create a privacy coin; it has a Zcash-like governance.
1c. GRIN: Technical users, CLI wallet. BEAM: Non-technical users, GUI wallet on several platforms.
1d. GRIN: New token issued every second. BEAM: Fixed amount, similar to BTC.
2. They are both potentially susceptible to ML analysis, because of the design’s inability to conceal inputs and outputs. They implemented Dandelion to deal with these attacks.
Whereas 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.
“Beam is a professional effort to create a privacy coin, there is an alignment of incentives within the block rewards so that the project won’t die,” Romanov said.
In this regard, Grin takes a different approach, relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project.
Grin is targeting non technical users, while Beam is targeting technical ones.
Beam has a fixed supply, while Grin is issuing a token every second.
Both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. They are implementing Dandelion to deal with this potential problem.
- Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
a) Funding
i) GRIN: Donations
ii) BEAM: Sought VC
b) Governance
i) GRIN: Relies on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the Monero project.
ii) 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) Target Customer
i) GRIN: More technical users due to the knowledge needed to use its wallet
ii) BEAM: Regular users with its GUI wallet and Mobile wallet.
d) Emission Schedules
i) GRIN: Tokens are issued every second and there is no fixed supply.
ii) BEAM: Coins have a fixed issuance akin to Bitcoin and have a fixed supply. - What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
Both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. To tackle this concern, both are using Dandelion.
1.1) Grin: community funding + donations. Work part time as a research Project
Beam: VC funding. Work fulltime
1.2) Grin: Open-Source, community driven
Beam: Corporate Structure, Block rewards used for Foundation
1.3) Grin: less accessible, cmd Wallet, for technical users
Beam: more usable, Wallet interface, multiple OS supported, for everyone
1.4) Grin: Currency, sustained issuance, 1 per second forever
Beam: Store of Value, limited emission
2.) Both are potentially vulnerable to machine-learning analysis
They want to implement Dandelions
2.)
Grin
Funding - Donations
Governance - Community Driven
Target Customer - Anyone that wanted more privacy
Emission Schedule - 1 per second forever
Beam
Funding - VC money
Governance - Company Driven
Target Customer - Anyone that wanted more privacy
Emission Schedule - Limited supply with the incentive to early users
- They added Dandelion
1
A. Grin’s team is volunteer and receives occasional donations. Beam is business oriented, has sought and received Venture Capital funding, and has full time developers.
B. Grin uses a community funding model similar to Monero, while Beam feeds part of block mining rewards to a foundation meant to fund development.
C. Grin aims to be used as currency, while Beam hopes to be used as a store of value.
D. Grin issues 1 coin per second, indefinitely, but is unfixed. Beam has a fixed emission schedule.
- MimbleWimble conceals sender, receiver, and amount all as part of the protocol, but struggles to conceal inputs and outputs. That is being addressed with Dandelion.
Describe the difference between GRIN’s and BEAM’s…
Funding
- Grin: community funding
- Beam: through block rewards and VC funding
Governance
- Grin: no central organization involved, community governed
- Beam: through a centralized structure
Target Customer
- Grin: Technical users
- Beam: as much users as possible
Emission Schedules
- Grin: undefined; a new token is issued every block
- Beam: the objective is to be a store of value, with a similar issuance methodology
What is the key privacy concern of both, and what feature do they implement to deal with this?
Both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs
-
A) Grin: only donations, Beam: VC funding
B) G: community driven , B: corporate structure
C) G: targeted technical users , B: Mainstream adoption
D) G: not fixed supply with the creation of one coin per second , B: similar to BTC with a fixed issuance -
Being vulnerable or not having privacy on your tx witch both project try to solve with Dandelion implementation
a. Grin is run on donations. Beam is funded by block rewards to the team.
b. Grin is community governed, Beam is more corporate.
c. Grin is targeted towards the technical crowd for now. Beam is targeted towards everyone.
d. Grin has no hard cap. Beam has a hard cap with halvings.
- Privacy concern for both is that they are both vulnerable to machine learning analysis.
1.1. Grin:
- large community + under active development since 2016
- open-source code repository on Github, coded in Rust,
- volunteer-based development, part-time - very slowly (structured as a research project),
a) do not receive any outside funding except for donations, no token premine or ICO
b) relying on a community funding model that is similar to the one utilized by the monero project (less reliable income source - increases the security)
c) only offers a command-line wallet, and is less accessible for non-technical users.
(aimed at a technical crowd,‘use at your own risk’, especially in the early days)
d) monetary policy is unfixed - a token is issued every second - sustained issuance will stabilize the value of the currency - a currency, not a ‘store of value’
1.2. Beam:
- came later into the industry, entering the space in March 2018,
- on its early days was not open-source, coded in C++
- hired a team of developers to work full-time,
a) sought VC funding
b) maintaining a corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development (example from zcash).
c) - heavy emphasis on usability, having built a simple wallet interface - user-friendly, - having a GUI wallet and mobile wallet will increase adoption, number of tx and usage - thus increase the anonymity set,
- the wallet boasts implementations in different operating systems, including MacOS, Windows, and Linux.
d) a “store of value” coin that has a fixed issuance schedule akin to bitcoin.
- Both implementations may potentially be vulnerable to machine-learning analysis – due to the design’s failure to conceal inputs and outputs. To prevent this both teams currently implement a privacy feature named Dandelion.
- a. Funding: 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.
b. Governance: Grin is relying on a community funding model and Beam is maintaining a corporate structure, and funneling a portion of the block reward into a Foundation to support the blockchain’s development.
c. Target Customer: Grin is focusing on technical users, while Beam is more user-friendly.
d. Emission Schedules: Grin’s monetary policy is unfixed (currently, a new token is issued every second) while Beam has a fixed issuance schedule (limited).
- Potential vulnerability against machine-learning analysis. To deal with this both projects want to implement Dandelion.