Re: Legacy systems vs blockchains - what is the spec impact?

Hello Daniel,

Eric Martindale with BitPay here.  BitPay is major payment processor in the Bitcoin economy, currently processing an increasing volume of several millions of dollars worth of bitcoin transactions per day.  We focus exclusively on accepting Bitcoin payments on behalf of our merchants, and have a large industry exposure to the overall ecosystem of decentralized systems and cryptofinance in general.

Proof of Identity is one major focus point that we feel is under-represented in the WebPayments Group, especially in regards to a transition from the legacy financial infrastructure to a post-blockchain infrastructure with no single points of failure (SPOF).  

Currently, this is addressed in the WebPayments group through the use of centralized oracles, or Identity Providers.  This will lead to a secondary centralized system not unlike the current CA infrastructure.  Ideally, this should be replaced with a blockchain-based identity solution, such as Namecoin, or another more sophisticated platform, perhaps utilizing recent innovations using sidechain pegging.

Additionally, over-representation of the legacy “pull”-based financial infrastructure is narrowing focus around centralized providers rather than decentralized networks.  BitPay would like to see additional efforts made to incorporate “push”-based financial mechanisms such as Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

Sincerely,

Eric Martindale, BitPay
+1 (919) 374-2020

On Oct 22, 2014, at 9:40 PM, Daniel.Buchner <Daniel.Buchner@target.com> wrote:

> Hello Web Pay-ers,
> 
> My first question for the group after last reviewing these specs over a year ago: How much are they crafted around traditional payment systems vs new tech like blockchains? More specifically, if for a moment you imagine a world where payments happened primarily over a shared blockchain, would significant portions of these specs be irrelevant without the encumbrance of legacy payment systems?
> 
> - Daniel