A safe way to remove objectionable content from the blockchain

The discussion raises concerns about the implications of Zerosync and Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) on Bitcoin's decentralization and security. The core argument revolves around the necessity of proof-of-publication for maintaining Bitcoin's decentralized nature and the functionality of Hashed Timelock Contracts (HTLCs), especially within the Lightning Network. Proof-of-publication ensures that blocks are widely disseminated in a manner conducive to new block creation, a foundational aspect of Bitcoin mining that promotes decentralization.

Zerosync, powered by ZKP technology, enables the validation of a block hash and its preceding blocks without disclosing the full block contents. This method, while proving the legitimacy of transactions and blocks, omits the Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) set data essential for mining activities. Such an approach could potentially disrupt the incentive model for miners to distribute block data comprehensively, as it allows the validation of coin validity without the need for full block information. This scenario poses a risk to the value proposition of newly mined coins and, by extension, the motivation for miners to share block data necessary for continued mining efforts.

Furthermore, the reliance of HTLCs on proof-of-publication for security is highlighted. HTLCs necessitate the publication of a pre-image on the Bitcoin blockchain to facilitate redemption and ensure the security of the transaction. Zerosync's ability to validate transactions without revealing the pre-image compromises this security mechanism, posing a significant threat to the integrity of transactions over the Lightning Network.

The communication underscores the need for alternative solutions that preserve the integral aspects of Bitcoin's design, such as decentralization and secure, transparent transactions. It argues against viewing ZKP/Zerosync as a panacea for addressing issues related to harmful data within the blockchain. Instead, it advocates for the development of consensus protocols that require access to the complete block contents for validation. Addressing the challenge of harmful data embedded in the blockchain is suggested to be approached through legal and political avenues rather than technological workarounds that compromise core principles. For more insights, Peter Todd’s perspectives can be further explored at Peter Todd's website.