W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > September 2013

Re: Attempts for payment escrow

From: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:50:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CADcbRRMPPN0nB+O7rjvx0eF3S45r9ha=hPVR9HfEOL-m1BqRvA@mail.gmail.com>
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.

Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 18:50:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:24 UTC