- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 21:45:15 +0100
- To: Rafael Pereira <rafael@rippex.net>
- Cc: Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJ5sg2sF+4E8BgkwfSKFbPp62L6hw=187QoqvpYbY8HjA@mail.gmail.com>
On 29 February 2016 at 20:56, Rafael Pereira <rafael@rippex.net> wrote: > Melvin, what kind of conditions you have in mind? > The sky is the limit. But one thing I was thinking of programming was bounties for closing github issues. For example when a programmer completes a task and adds some code, a project will close an issue. You could make it so that when an issue is closed a bounty is released to that user. It would be verified by a github 'hook'. I think there are systems such as tip4commit that does this anyway. The difference here is that the verification takes place via the web, rather than, via PKI. I like PKI, but I like the web also. So I am wondering about what's in scope of the proposal and what's out, ie whether crypto implies PKI only. > > Em seg, 29 de fev de 2016 às 16:33, Melvin Carvalho < > melvincarvalho@gmail.com> escreveu: > >> On 29 February 2016 at 20:07, Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com> wrote: >> >>> Just wanted to follow up on Thursday's discussion by posting a first >>> draft and example implementation of the crypto-conditions spec: >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/interledger/five-bells-condition/tree/feature/binary-merkle >>> >>> Also here are the slides I presented on Thursday. For those who weren't >>> able to join, the presentation was recorded and we will seek to make the >>> recording available as soon as we can. >>> >>> http://www.slideshare.net/Interledger/ilp-workshop-cryptoconditions >>> >> >> I like it! >> >> But why, 'crypto' conditions, rather than 'verifiable' conditions -- it >> is branding or do we want to limit the scope? >> >> >>> >>> - Stefan >>> >> >> -- > > Obrigado, > Rafael > > *Rafael Olaio - CEO* > tel +55 11 2337.2225 > cel +55 11 99522.7572 > rippex.net > > Esta mensagem pode conter informação confidencial e/ou privilegiada. Se > você não for o destinatário ou a pessoa autorizada a receber esta mensagem, > não poderá usar, copiar ou divulgar as informações nela contidas ou tomar > qualquer ação baseada nessas informações. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por > engano, por favor avise imediatamente o remetente, respondendo o e-mail e > em seguida apague-o.This message may contain confidential and/or > privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to > receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take > any action based on this message or any information here in. If you have > received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by > reply e-mail and delete this message. >
Received on Monday, 29 February 2016 20:45:47 UTC