W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Crowdfunding: Assurance variations

From: Andrew Durham <ad@andrewdurham.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 22:50:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAP5m0mTXTW7agCFZocSK8JkuSC_QkqcsG9HER9NkEBKp20AS7g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: public-webpayments@w3.org
Hi, Manu,

Glad you like the idea and wish to allow for it in the code. It is the
first time you heard about Cooperative Dominant Assurance Contracts
because I just made it up a couple weeks ago! But had you heard about
Dr Tabarrock's Dominant Assurance Contracts?

I'm very glad to hear that only slight changes in the code are
necessary. I understand implementation will not happen now. I just
wanted to make sure there is an opening in the code for it to happen
later.

I assume the logic process for CDAC would exit the existing process
into a bunch of new code, then re-enter the existing sequence, then
terminate. Is that correct?

I am going to study the JSON architecture in the Intents document to
see if I can have a rough idea of it and to learn the vocabulary.

Andrew


On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 21:47, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> On 02/26/2012 01:49 AM, Andrew Durham wrote:
>>
>> Cooperative Dominant Assurance Contract
>>
>>
>> Iím pretty sure the rules are free of conflicts (though rule 6 might
>> be redundant). I don't grasp the math. And I couldn't describe this
>> with game theory or program it. But coming up with it was really
>> fun. And it shows a variety of possibilities for future crowdfunding
>> that creators of a new system might want it to be able to
>> facilitate.
>
>
> This is really neat - first time I have heard of a Cooperative Dominant
> Assurance Contract. I followed the links you included and read those as
> well... bottom line - I think that this is something that we can (and
> should) support in PaySwarm. We would have to modify the Payment Intents
> specification slightly, but it would be worth it to support this use case..
>
> Keep in mind that we're not too focused on Payment Intents right now, as
> we still want to make sure that the base of the system is implemented
> and is working properly before building on top of it. However, what you
> describe is a very interesting social/financial experiment and I don't
> see any reason why the current architecture couldn't support it.
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched
> http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/
>
Received on Sunday, 4 March 2012 06:23:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:20 UTC