<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1nxlvf9mj3jzgue25n5d9y47s3h5hvg0ded9hwpejdxj9mtrs34vs97wjrv</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1nxlvf9mj3jzgue25n5d9y47s3h5hvg0ded9hwpejdxj9mtrs34vs97wjrv</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2014-04-24&#xA;📝 Original message:On Wednesday 23 April 2014 15:31:38 Mike Hearn wrote:&#xA;&gt; &gt; There _are_ consequences though: 95% of the time, you end up buying&#xA;&gt; &gt; something and paying for it.&#xA;&gt; &#xA;&gt; Yeah, I was imagining a situation in which people who use Bitcoin regularly&#xA;&gt; do buy things they actually want, but wouldn&#39;t say no to occasionally&#xA;&gt; getting them for free (think coffees at starbucks etc). So if their double&#xA;&gt; spend fails, no big deal, they&#39;re no worse off than if they didn&#39;t try.&#xA;&#xA;Again true enough; but then we&#39;re back to evenly distributed dishonesty, and &#xA;so you still don&#39;t get the potential 5% scam being used at 100% capacity.&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;Andy&#xA;&#xA;-- &#xA;Dr Andy Parkins&#xA;andyparkins at gmail.com</html></oembed>