{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1qf6k0f8p0h89d43l0vnx2xp5yrfgjyl8tg3hkg8jtyudrllgw2usdlfn9a","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1qf6k0f8p0h89d43l0vnx2xp5yrfgjyl8tg3hkg8jtyudrllgw2usdlfn9a","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-19\n📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----\nHash: SHA512\n\nOn 2015-06-19 16:36, Matt Whitlock wrote:\n\u003e On Friday, 19 June 2015, at 3:53 pm, justusranvier at riseup.net wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I'd also like to note that \"prima facie\" doesn't mean \"always\", it \n\u003e\u003e means\n\u003e\u003e that \"the default assumption, unless proven otherwise.\"\n\u003e \n\u003e Why would you automatically assume fraud by default? Shouldn't the\n\u003e null hypothesis be the default? Without any information one way or\n\u003e another, you ought to make *no assumption* about the fraudulence or\n\u003e non-fraudulence of any given double-spend.\n\nIf we have ECDSA proof that an entity intentionally made and publicly \nannounced incompatible promises regarding the disposition of particular \nBitcoins under their control, then why shouldn't that be assumed to be a \nfraud attempt unless shown otherwise?\n\nThere are ways of achiving transaction fee adjustment after broadcast \nthat do not present the appearance of, or opportunity for, fraud. If \nthose options are available and the user chooses not to use them in \nfavor of the option that does, that makes bad intentions even more \nprobable.\n\n-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v2\n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\nZu2i5yjMlJzrDB8yXz/N\n=xtXD\n-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----"}