📅 Original date posted:2014-06-16
📝 Original message:> Any reason you think people will spread trust instead of consolidating of
a
bunch of instant transaction providers when time is critical?
Maybe you're right, but if you are, that's a huge reason not to implement
this. We should encourage proliferation of instant providers otherwise we
start becoming VISA all over again. That's a future for Bitcoin I'm not
excited about: "Use one of these 4 companies, or you need to wait an
impractical amount of time before your transaction will go through."
Come to think of it, is the payment protocol really the place to put this
instant provider signature or should it be in the actual Bitcoin
transaction? If we don't believe there is a valid practical solution to
doublespends (some people have already emailed me critical feedback on my
proposal) then we absolutely need a trust network, but we would also want
it to be part of the public ledger for everyone to see.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Lawrence Nahum <lawrence at greenaddress.it>
wrote:
> Daniel Rice <drice <at> greenmangosystems.com> writes:
>
> > If double spends are not resolved, there will be a million instant
> providers in the long run and if double spends are resolved then this BIP
> extension is completely unnecessary.
>
> I am not sure if double spends can be resolved, at the moment they are not
> and I highly doubt you will see millions instant providers just like I
> don't
> see millions Certificate Authorities and I don't see Million Credit Card
> networks.
>
> Any reason you think people will spread trust instead of consolidating of a
> bunch of instant transaction providers when time is critical?
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions
> Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems
> Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.
> Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140616/84ba0a06/attachment.html>;
Daniel Rice [ARCHIVE] /
npub1mn…3vect
2023-06-07 15:22:44
in reply to nevent1q…zaep
Author Public Key
npub1mn37wn20kd63upafw66dncxceyvfud6ceyjj37st94a9qlnsrweqn3vectPublished at
2023-06-07 15:22:44Event JSON
{
"id": "0410583454cc172f89365026b502f65917403c636b4d067e64a81e3470991f13",
"pubkey": "dce3e74d4fb3751e07a976b4d9e0d8c9189e3758c92528fa0b2d7a507e701bb2",
"created_at": 1686151364,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ed0eede28e160c2ef8ddd5af1ee3069fdb0eb5f4c939c1c09a1a5f338c30c628",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1051f5d7a4f1aff7281d3778d5822bf833b93c289b1865c9681717050e37962d",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"01743d784a0a13a1222bf0ac66fbc96a0423e7977745bb36f5eb47f1fd757f26"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-06-16\n📝 Original message:\u003e Any reason you think people will spread trust instead of consolidating of\na\nbunch of instant transaction providers when time is critical?\n\nMaybe you're right, but if you are, that's a huge reason not to implement\nthis. We should encourage proliferation of instant providers otherwise we\nstart becoming VISA all over again. That's a future for Bitcoin I'm not\nexcited about: \"Use one of these 4 companies, or you need to wait an\nimpractical amount of time before your transaction will go through.\"\n\nCome to think of it, is the payment protocol really the place to put this\ninstant provider signature or should it be in the actual Bitcoin\ntransaction? If we don't believe there is a valid practical solution to\ndoublespends (some people have already emailed me critical feedback on my\nproposal) then we absolutely need a trust network, but we would also want\nit to be part of the public ledger for everyone to see.\n\n\nOn Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Lawrence Nahum \u003clawrence at greenaddress.it\u003e\nwrote:\n\n\u003e Daniel Rice \u003cdrice \u003cat\u003e greenmangosystems.com\u003e writes:\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e If double spends are not resolved, there will be a million instant\n\u003e providers in the long run and if double spends are resolved then this BIP\n\u003e extension is completely unnecessary.\n\u003e\n\u003e I am not sure if double spends can be resolved, at the moment they are not\n\u003e and I highly doubt you will see millions instant providers just like I\n\u003e don't\n\u003e see millions Certificate Authorities and I don't see Million Credit Card\n\u003e networks.\n\u003e\n\u003e Any reason you think people will spread trust instead of consolidating of a\n\u003e bunch of instant transaction providers when time is critical?\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions\n\u003e Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems\n\u003e Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.\n\u003e Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing \u0026 Easy Data Exploration\n\u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140616/84ba0a06/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "126bfebe2c748bf9b071f530b79a1af4f4ab11fcfa331685570f319603db780cdb2b551e6f0b131007e7e5d2bf5a5618505fdfc5dea2fe8f1d73c3238ecf28dd"
}