- From: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:50:12 -0400
- To: eanders@pobox.com
- Cc: Web Payments <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:00 AM, <eanders@pobox.com> wrote: > In short, attaching conditions to the spending of sent virtual currency. > > Example: Buyer and Seller must both use their digital signature to unlock > the spending of a sent virtual currency. > > IMO, this is one of the largest dropped balls in Bitcoins, Ripple, etc... > Also proof of transactions is the 2nd dropped ball. > > Sure, not perfect, some risk like extortion for very large transfers, but > its a step in the right direction. A web payment system will never be > general public accepted if "all transactions are always final, and no, there > is no recourse if you were ripped off, too bad, so sad". > I'm not quite sure what you are saying or asking. Do you want escrow features to be a part of standards? Do you have specific suggestions on what you'd like to see? You can do some fancy things with the Bitcoin protocol such as complex escrow systems. Though I don't think those features are easy (or possible?) to use yet. I think most escrow systems rely on a trusted third party to handle the escrow transaction rather than just a Buyer and Seller unlocking funds (since that's not much of an escrow case). What kind of "proof of transactions" do you want? Finality of transactions seems to be a different issue than escrow. -dave
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 18:50:39 UTC