Editor's Note: This article comes fromChain News ChainNewsChain News ChainNewsbreakermag, published with permission.

(ID: chainnewscom), author: David Z. Morris, translation: Ginny, source:

, published with permission.

In January, the new privacy-focused cryptocurrency Grin launched to much fanfare. Its founder, following in the footsteps of Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, went by the pseudonym Ignotus Peverell, a name from the Harry Potter books who possessed an invisibility cloak and cleverly escaped death. The true identity of Ignotus Peverell is unknown.

On February 27, breakermag.com reporter David Z. Morris interviewed Peverell via email, asking about the development of Grin since its release, and what experiences and lessons can be shared with colleagues in the cryptocurrency field during this process. Peverell points out:

1. Cryptocurrencies have a clearly achievable goal: to create better money. Grin's positioning is such a simple and feasible realistic goal, and why the world needs Grin.

2. There are many projects that are exaggerated as revolutionary innovations that can be realized immediately, and hype and publicity are carried out, and the mainstream direction and public attention are led to the wrong direction that deviates greatly from the goal of "creating better currency" superior.

3. The huge amount of ICO will inevitably lead to huge sequelae.

4. Although many designs of Grin are based on the MimbleWimble protocol, Grin is actually closer to Monroe or Bitcoin.

5. There is no perfect solution for the issuance mechanism of cryptocurrency; if there is no credible strategy to follow, then choose the simplest rational solution. There is nothing wrong with Grin's fixed issuance rate scheme design.

6. Be very wary of the sudden wealth of cryptocurrency projects, it is bound to be a distraction.

7. I am convinced that cryptocurrencies do have the opportunity to have a broad, positive impact on the lives of many people. Don't get lost in the weeds.

Question 1: First, how do you feel the Grin mainnet has gone since its launch?

Ignotus: Pretty good so far. On the technical side, there haven't been any major issues; the Grin community has also been growing rapidly. Of course, we are still in the early stages and there is still a lot of work to be done, mostly around user experience and performance improvements. In terms of research, Grin will have some more radical and wonderful improvements, which will be very promising in the future.

Question 2: Other projects in the blockchain or cryptocurrency field will deliberately hype and promote, but Grin has taken a completely different path: completely community-driven and non-profit. What are the considerations behind this decision?

Ignotus: First of all, there have been quite clear signs of overheating in the blockchain or cryptocurrency space. Second, I'm very disturbed by the sorts of moral hazard that exist in most new projects. Although there may be some very tempting things to say about investing in cryptocurrency projects in various articles and reports, if you want to keep yourself in line with the correct laws of nature, you will obviously quickly realize that there is no such thing as free money. Lunch. Recognizing and accepting some blockchain projects to carry out huge ICOs will inevitably lead to huge sequelae.

Rather than those patterns, I'd rather focus on creating something I believe in, building on and perfecting over time. Grin's current approach seems to be the best way I can think of to achieve this goal, and it also keeps Grin as far away from those troubles and distractions as possible.

Question 3: Why do you think the world needs a privacy coin of one kind or another?

Ignotus: When I started working on the Grin project, I wasn't happy with the direction of most cryptocurrencies at the time, privacy-oriented or not. Even as things stand now, I still think so in some respects. So far, it looks like cryptocurrencies have one clearly achievable goal: to create better money. This requires a fascinating and fairly obvious set of properties: digitization, privacy, trustworthiness by which I mean security and censorship resistance, and a few other smaller ones. Grin's positioning is such a simple and feasible realistic goal, and why the world needs Grin.

But instead, we see that most projects in the blockchain and cryptocurrency space are chasing a bunch of exaggerated features to match the hype and publicity, hoping to capture more and bigger bubbles and profit from them. To be clearer, I have a lot of respect for projects that try to push blockchain and cryptocurrency research forward in terms of things that are possible, but those should only be seen as research projects and not hugely hyped as something that is immediately achievable Revolutionary innovation with hype and publicity, and directing mainstream direction and mass attention in the wrong direction is a huge departure from this clear, achievable goal.

I'm not an extremist, but I believe in the ideals of Bitcoin. But Bitcoin is now 10 years old, and drastic changes are unlikely, and considering the amount of research and development that has been done to Bitcoin since its release, the 10 years of development is almost equivalent to the previous century. Since Bitcoin is difficult to make drastic changes, when the Mimblewimble white paper was released, given its perfect characteristics, it seemed to be a good cornerstone to aim at this ideal and launch a new charge.

Question 4: The most interesting economic decision in Grin's design is to "inflate" the supply curve, at least in theory. Do you think Bitcoin's fear of inflation and love of "hard money" will be convincing?

Ignotus: Not really. There is no evidence that Bitcoin's supply curve is optimal. Plus, a growing body of solid research shows that Bitcoin’s supply curve is problematic in several ways.

To be honest, I don't have a perfect idea of ​​how economics applies to the design of cryptocurrency issuance mechanisms, but that's not to say there aren't any promising directions. Pragmatically, then, the best route seems to be to follow only strategies that have been reasonably justified and believed to be trustworthy before, either empirically or through solid research; and if there are no such believable strategies to follow, then choose the easiest rational solution. If the supply curve adopts the early large-proportion supply scheme, it is probably a scam, and soon there is no essential difference from the pre-mining scheme. The long-tailed supply curve scenario is safer.

With all these factors in mind, Grin's fixed issuance rate scheme proves to be right, simpler than any known supply curve, with far less market uncertainty aka the "halving" event, And more fair. Is there any reason not to like this scheme?

Question 5: Beam previously provided some support for Grin's security audit fundraiser. How do you see the relationship between the two MimbleWimble projects, Beam and Grin?

Ignotus: A common misconception is that MimbleWimble describes a complete cryptocurrency solution, thus tending to put Beam in the same basket as us. But in reality, the MimbleWimble white paper is very short, specifying only a small part of the blockchain format. So while many of Grin's design decisions are based on MimbleWimble, I actually think Grin is closer to Monero or Bitcoin. We are very grateful for Beam's donation to Grin's development, as well as everyone else who continues to donate and support Grin!

Question 6: You remain anonymous, which is more rare these days than it used to be. The lead developer of the current largest privacy coin, Monero, often posts videos from his own house! What made you decide to go anonymous?

Ignotus: There doesn't seem to be any downside to being anonymous. From my perspective and those around me, I don't want the pressure of being a public figure. By being anonymous, I also do not become a victim of those who want to influence me or profit indirectly from my post.

For contributors and developers directly involved with Grin, I can be a good layer of isolation: people can blame me instead of them. My anonymity prevents over-polarization of the Grin community and keeps the project more decentralized. It's a good thing that I can't appear in public, have voice or video conferences, use podcasts or tweet. Because it means Grin has many public figures, not just one. Anonymity also helps maintain self-control.

Question 7: When Yeastplume, one of the developers of Grin, started raising funds for his work, the community response to donations was a bit lukewarm. While you posted in the community forum expressing your disappointment that the fundraiser was completed quickly and exceeded its original goal, do you worry about Grin's long-term continued development funding?

Ignotus: The community has solicited donations several times, and each one has been successful. We need a community that continues to support Grin to underpin Grin's future success. It is my hope that all entities interested in Grin move beyond the bidding and competition that is common in normal economic activity, and that they realize that they can all benefit from participating in the Grin community in constructive ways.

In the case of Linux, various competing companies have contributed directly or indirectly to the development of the Linux kernel. I hope the same goes for Grin. As Grin grows, all community participants, including all participating companies, can grow with it. As for myself, I'm not too worried, I'm doing okay, if I need anything, I'll let the community know.

Question 8: Last question. Grin has been seen as a symbol of a cryptocurrency returning to its roots, finally waking people up from bubbles and busts. What suggestions do you have for the wider industry to help cryptocurrencies and blockchains evolve and be adopted over the next five to ten years?