{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub18gjvug29c4yg46lmplq38e75gg6wn5mn8taytckcsr4jt8p74h3s5knkzl","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub18gjvug29c4yg46lmplq38e75gg6wn5mn8taytckcsr4jt8p74h3s5knkzl","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-27\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On 27 June 2015 03:14:41 GMT-04:00, Aaron Voisine \u003cvoisine at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003eAlso remember that the sender is not the one who cares about delays or\n\u003e \u003eeven\n\u003e \u003egetting confirmations at all, it's the receiver who's concerned with\n\u003e \u003ethese\n\u003e \u003ethings. They have to tell the sender up-front what they're willing to\n\u003e \u003eaccept in exchange for goods and services.\n\u003e\n\u003e You're assuming a receiver who is accepting a zeroconf transaction; most\n\u003e receivers don't.\n\u003e\n\u003e For instance, when I deposit funds on my exchange they don't credit those\n\u003e funds until 4 confirmations, so I very much cafe about how long it takes to\n\u003e get the first confirmation.\n\u003e\n\nYes, the receiver can tell the sender up-front that they are only willing\naccept 4-confirmations, and put that on the sender to figure out, but the\nsender then only cares because it's the receiver's requirement. The\nreceiver is the one who cares.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150627/37f62e6d/attachment.html\u003e"}