simple dumb raffle

[bbjubjub2494]

idk if this works but it typechecks just test in production

[RobinJadoul]

What are all those imports, lmao?

This misses some of the weight Leo used to have in the original design and some of the transparency/verifiability
The transparency can probably be fixed with some extra output + commiting to the randomness seed at the start
Also something to think about is e.g. use cases where we want to raffle multiple prizes, but with disjoint winner groups, and not everyone interested in every prize

[bbjubjub2494]

Linting was not specified.

No doubt. We just talked about it at the MOM: weights should be private. It seems like verifiability on its own is possible, but verifiability combined with private inputs is too moon math for this repo. Instead we just trust the Ro{bin,bot}. More complex raffles are planned.

[lucidBrot]

Regarding testing: it's not hard to make a test discord server and run the bot temporarily on your laptop. imo worth doing.

MOM Notes regarding this raffle feature:

How to efficiently raffle stuff?
maybe discord bot
but if it is predictable then it would be possible to cheat by changing your inputs
but you don’t know everyone else’s inputs
we can offer buttons to make the command not show the inputs
but then we would have to formalize what it means to be fair, or keep each item raffle independent
conclusion: noone cares, so lourkeur can choose between privacy and fairness

Essentially, we discussed that we definitely want to maintain the two weights ("how much do you want the item?", "how much did you play?") but nobody had any opinion about privacy vs verifiability so we concluded that there is no need to engineer this too much.

[bbjubjub2494]

Will testserver after exams