{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1dw9jxy0p6fyd6gxcxsqgp2uhslas47tam2y36kwjyzlryq3tuvtsvr3e7q","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1dw9jxy0p6fyd6gxcxsqgp2uhslas47tam2y36kwjyzlryq3tuvtsvr3e7q","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23\n📝 Original message:Isn't a faster blockchain for transactions (maybe as a sidechain) solving\nthe problem? If there would be a safe way for 0-confirmation transactions,\nthe Bitcoin blockchain wouldn't even be needed.\n\n\nOn Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003ewrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Right, this works in the Bitcoin network today absent any collusion by\n\u003e\u003e the miners. You give one miner a transaction and you give every other\n\u003e\u003e node you can reach another transaction.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Yes, but that can be fixed with double spend alerts.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Someone you ask to not double spend is an entirely separate matter.\n\u003e\u003e They aren't self-selecting: you select who you trust to not make\n\u003e\u003e double spends and there is no need for this trust to be globally\n\u003e\u003e consistent.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e No? It's not just your decision that matters, the receiver also has to\n\u003e trust them. They're like a dispute mediator in this regard. You can pick\n\u003e whoever you want, but that doesn't matter if the receiver doesn't recognise\n\u003e them or trust them. You have to find an overlap to make an instant trade.\n\u003e\n\u003e In practice if people have to think about this, evaluate brands etc then\n\u003e you'd get a very small number of parties because the value of global\n\u003e agreement is so high. Then it becomes hard to remove ones that have a lot\n\u003e of momentum.\n\u003e\n\u003e The censorship resistance of the block chain doesn't matter if your double\n\u003e spending partners refuse to help you spend your money (because they're\n\u003e being coerced). The censorship can just happen at a different place.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e To stop GHash.io we would have to take away their hardware or change the\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin\n\u003e\u003e protocol to make their hardware useless\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ..... or, have a majority decide to zero out their coinbase rewards for\n\u003e blocks that double spent against dice sites. That wouldn't undo the double\n\u003e spend, but you can't do that with the multisig scheme either. All you can\n\u003e do is punish the corrupted party post-hoc, either by not using them again,\n\u003e or by \"unpaying\" them for the service they did not provide.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform\n\u003e Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software\n\u003e Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready\n\u003e Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform\n\u003e http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform\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\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/381deca8/attachment.html\u003e"}