eric at voskuil.org [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2021-07-09 📝 Original message:All reasonable. e > Okay, ...
📅 Original date posted:2021-07-09
📝 Original message:All reasonable.
e
> Okay, it seems to me that what you are saying is something like this:
>
> > Proof-of-reserves would (partially) work for a "pure" warehousing service
> (i.e. user pays some fee, service keeps money and provides proofs that
> money is kept).
> > However, "pure" warehousing is not what a typical exchange does (else
> the explicit fees in their exchanges would be higher), as it takes on risk due
> to having to deal with non-Bitcoin monopoly money (by definition, since they
> are *exchanges*).
> > Further, with Bitcoin you can be your own warehouse (including Green-like
> multisig schemes where you own your own keys that are part of the
> scheme), which is an alternative choice to hiring a "pure warehouse" (i.e.
> Safe Deposit).
>
> Would that be a fair (if somewhat rough and undetailed) restatement?
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
📝 Original message:All reasonable.
e
> Okay, it seems to me that what you are saying is something like this:
>
> > Proof-of-reserves would (partially) work for a "pure" warehousing service
> (i.e. user pays some fee, service keeps money and provides proofs that
> money is kept).
> > However, "pure" warehousing is not what a typical exchange does (else
> the explicit fees in their exchanges would be higher), as it takes on risk due
> to having to deal with non-Bitcoin monopoly money (by definition, since they
> are *exchanges*).
> > Further, with Bitcoin you can be your own warehouse (including Green-like
> multisig schemes where you own your own keys that are part of the
> scheme), which is an alternative choice to hiring a "pure warehouse" (i.e.
> Safe Deposit).
>
> Would that be a fair (if somewhat rough and undetailed) restatement?
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj