<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1qf6k0f8p0h89d43l0vnx2xp5yrfgjyl8tg3hkg8jtyudrllgw2usdlfn9a</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1qf6k0f8p0h89d43l0vnx2xp5yrfgjyl8tg3hkg8jtyudrllgw2usdlfn9a</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2015-06-19&#xA;📝 Original message:-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----&#xA;Hash: SHA512&#xA;&#xA;On 2015-06-19 16:42, Eric Lombrozo wrote:&#xA;&gt; If we want a non-repudiation mechanism in the protocol, we should&#xA;&gt; explicitly define one rather than relying on “prima facie”&#xA;&gt; assumptions. Otherwise, I would recommend not relying on the existence&#xA;&gt; of a signed transaction as proof of intent to pay…&#xA;&#xA;Again, I&#39;m not talking about any changes to the protocol. The mining &#xA;mechanism in the Bitcoin protocol is the fallback method of resolving &#xA;fraud that isn&#39;t prevented or resolved via other mechanisms.&#xA;&#xA;There are plenty of other ways economic actors resolve their &#xA;disagreements other than blockchain adjudication. Sometimes when both &#xA;parties are identified and reside in the same legal jurisdiction, &#xA;contract violations and fraud can be adjudicated in courts. In some &#xA;situations, the parties involved may have access to private dispute &#xA;resolution techniques.&#xA;&#xA;Sometimes the stakeholders in the network act to preserve the long term &#xA;value of their investments, even if it means passing short-term profits. &#xA;The more of those stakeholders there are in Bitcoin, the more effective &#xA;it is to make the case for choices that are long-term beneficial.&#xA;&#xA;The degree to which anyone should rely on a signed transaction as &#xA;assurance of future payment is not a question with a universal answer. &#xA;It depends on the particular details of the situation, and the parties &#xA;involved, and their own risk tolerances and time preferences. There&#39;s no &#xA;right answer for everyone, which is why &#34;let&#39;s break zeroconf because &#xA;*I* don&#39;t think it&#39;s safe enough&#34; is a kind of vandalism.&#xA;-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----&#xA;Version: GnuPG v2&#xA;&#xA;iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVhEkhAAoJECpf2nDq2eYj8qAP/0qYP7FJDjke1qNARGkySjC5&#xA;8fSuefu8bus/O2fNYsvPf0OcHeqepLUtQ/hgTml5AHaF1Fa9iZopVr8nZv0NFMuF&#xA;sv9RfkBKvnnrLWre3e/kQIdKzdMXompEsDwGfIeM3qvVV9AD3mKrz/YNmjs60+hU&#xA;rEdLCX8xw3ZvF3CGOzE1KnOMbADEd7i3E/Pm1n7pLVdRAg2CIU+w6mjErgucSdvB&#xA;kQ9SNAVQngjhMJyVbxsQh/+/xgecdqeZ07aaGsLhiw6zML2Tz8KMhrjJ9xw9+7h0&#xA;Gze+JdqxpgH4QrvD8KMDnlZjM+cWDUGyoVfsRvrVvPdW6kejU1r1B5Pf6dJg9TwZ&#xA;kK48RJFdd2rpAkz/kAbvQtoNMxSxhm2gKKFLEMi7g8MZUiGa/Rxj0tWL7OL9SA1U&#xA;VfpUzgAovoat9lBQM92T5vcS6kfhiNgAmF24ULGGYIhts77Ae6h8Fl3TECtnR0dM&#xA;1U1yio4Im1TfUDfjqNSK+ZjVpzkQli0R057y6XzI9HWkSYo94WyjNVoUlUozuAam&#xA;/2+tUMTrMYPeApRv+1nv13InYO8RZiFqs0E4w4TmB5V4Xt6uGUz4Olioyuo0NqMO&#xA;lBZwa1ZWKw4fLgHHDu9FhTEOXsOcX5W0gEgcoqMlzTzyoapekk9Esd0pAFLYxYMY&#xA;YQyAWtWUA4JBbgLxlB8Y&#xA;=x8eh&#xA;-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----</html></oembed>