rich1.0npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgydhttps://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgydnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-02-12 📝 Original message:> > 1. They won't be attacking Bitcoin, they will attack merchants who accept > payments with 0 confirmations. > Which is basically all of them other than exchanges. Any merchant that uses BitPay or Coinbase, for instance, or any physical shop. If you want to play word games and redefine "Bitcoin" to be something other than what people are actually using, go right ahead. You will win the argument under your own definitions which nobody else is using. In your scenario I won't be able to get hamburgers for free because people will stop selling them for ordinary bitcoin transactions. Most will say, you know what, just pay me with Visa instead. And a few might knuckle down and set up some network of PKI-like trusted third parties that interacts with the block chain in some way. Though eventually, if that were to happen, cunning merchants will notice that having received a transaction counter-signed by a TTP they don't actually have to broadcast it or pay miner fees at all. They can just keep it around in their wallet and pass it along to the next guy when they purchase something with those coins. Eventually whoever ends up not being able to find a matching TTP gets to be the sucker who pays all the miner fees at once, because he is the only one who actually needs their services. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150212/e2f3ae22/attachment.html>