Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-04-24 📝 Original message:On 4/24/14, Mike Hearn ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-04-24
📝 Original message:On 4/24/14, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
>>
>> This scheme would discourage people from attempting a Finney attack
>> because they would end up worse off if they did.
>>
> Phrased another way, it simply makes every block a Finney attack that
> charges the maximum double spending fee possible. This doesn't solve the
> problem.
This solves regular double-spends, not Finney attacks, but finney
attacks (which are not really the easiest attacks in the world) don't
get any worse.
On 4/24/14, Chris Pacia <ctpacia at gmail.com> wrote:
> It would work but it's an ugly hack IMO. What do people do if they don't
> have extra to pay when making a purchase? I have 200 mbtc and want to buy a
> 200 mbtc phone but I can't because I need 400 mbtc. Sucks for me.
>
> I would much prefer the hassle of a green address notary than always having
> to make sure I have double what I need to make a purchase.
This scheme wouldn't be mandatory. You can still wait for
confirmations or rely somehow on existing trust instead if that's
better for you on that situation.
> Beyond needing to double balances, what if the shop is selling me a phone
> on contract? So the actual cost of the phone is lower than the real price
> on the assumption of future revenue. Alice double spends (aka steals) the
> phone, paying double the artifically lower cost but still making a good
> saving. Bob does not end up with "nothing", he ends up in the red.
Sybil attacks aside, Alice can't save anything, period. If she tries
she will end up losing it all.
I don't see how signing a longer term contract protects her in any way.
> But there's a much simpler way to dispose with this idea. Jorge, go down to
> your local bars and cafes, and ask them if they'd be willing to accept a
> form of payment that allows anyone to steal from them by simply paying
> double the purchase price to some other random guy. They *will* look at you
> as if you're crazy. Why would they ever do that?
They would do that to avoid having to wait for a confirmation or two
(I think one is good enough for most small purchases) when being paid
by people they don't trust just before they leave.
Maybe they prefer to just make people wait if they think that will
make them pay up-front.
This is completely optional and only an improvement on the current situation.
Of course if we're not comparing this with Bitcoin today and we're
comparing it to some theoretical mechanism for instant p2p
serialization without requiring proof of work then, yes, this concept
is not very interesting.
Published at
2023-06-07 15:19:56Event JSON
{
"id": "f14001c093e71ea38530bd2ee5d9cff97b6fc6adfbe79a2fb8ba52f7c4453ddb",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686151196,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"cbae5370c0fac063b93fe25e463d6a23eaea87b5ec5150107ff016f5d75aa470",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"a196674fbf129ecf5a40502a5c72cf521cb2030447288fbe5d3e5fb5c47a414c",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-04-24\n📝 Original message:On 4/24/14, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e This scheme would discourage people from attempting a Finney attack\n\u003e\u003e because they would end up worse off if they did.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e Phrased another way, it simply makes every block a Finney attack that\n\u003e charges the maximum double spending fee possible. This doesn't solve the\n\u003e problem.\n\nThis solves regular double-spends, not Finney attacks, but finney\nattacks (which are not really the easiest attacks in the world) don't\nget any worse.\n\nOn 4/24/14, Chris Pacia \u003cctpacia at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e It would work but it's an ugly hack IMO. What do people do if they don't\n\u003e have extra to pay when making a purchase? I have 200 mbtc and want to buy a\n\u003e 200 mbtc phone but I can't because I need 400 mbtc. Sucks for me.\n\u003e\n\u003e I would much prefer the hassle of a green address notary than always having\n\u003e to make sure I have double what I need to make a purchase.\n\nThis scheme wouldn't be mandatory. You can still wait for\nconfirmations or rely somehow on existing trust instead if that's\nbetter for you on that situation.\n\n\u003e Beyond needing to double balances, what if the shop is selling me a phone\n\u003e on contract? So the actual cost of the phone is lower than the real price\n\u003e on the assumption of future revenue. Alice double spends (aka steals) the\n\u003e phone, paying double the artifically lower cost but still making a good\n\u003e saving. Bob does not end up with \"nothing\", he ends up in the red.\n\nSybil attacks aside, Alice can't save anything, period. If she tries\nshe will end up losing it all.\nI don't see how signing a longer term contract protects her in any way.\n\n\u003e But there's a much simpler way to dispose with this idea. Jorge, go down to\n\u003e your local bars and cafes, and ask them if they'd be willing to accept a\n\u003e form of payment that allows anyone to steal from them by simply paying\n\u003e double the purchase price to some other random guy. They *will* look at you\n\u003e as if you're crazy. Why would they ever do that?\n\nThey would do that to avoid having to wait for a confirmation or two\n(I think one is good enough for most small purchases) when being paid\nby people they don't trust just before they leave.\nMaybe they prefer to just make people wait if they think that will\nmake them pay up-front.\nThis is completely optional and only an improvement on the current situation.\n\nOf course if we're not comparing this with Bitcoin today and we're\ncomparing it to some theoretical mechanism for instant p2p\nserialization without requiring proof of work then, yes, this concept\nis not very interesting.",
"sig": "e0e7a899d565d27483ba74e8206b892408767ecbf202a5595bfc78ba3043c3b3d4131d6e63a626c3d0da621356fecff782fd834846bd6752ba6b915c892588b9"
}