Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-02-12 📝 Original message:> > 1. They won't be ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-02-12
📝 Original message:>
> 1. They won't be attacking Bitcoin, they will attack merchants who accept
> payments with 0 confirmations.
>
Which is basically all of them other than exchanges. Any merchant that uses
BitPay or Coinbase, for instance, or any physical shop.
If you want to play word games and redefine "Bitcoin" to be something other
than what people are actually using, go right ahead. You will win the
argument under your own definitions which nobody else is using.
In your scenario I won't be able to get hamburgers for free because people
will stop selling them for ordinary bitcoin transactions. Most will say,
you know what, just pay me with Visa instead. And a few might knuckle down
and set up some network of PKI-like trusted third parties that interacts
with the block chain in some way.
Though eventually, if that were to happen, cunning merchants will notice
that having received a transaction counter-signed by a TTP they don't
actually have to broadcast it or pay miner fees at all. They can just keep
it around in their wallet and pass it along to the next guy when they
purchase something with those coins. Eventually whoever ends up not being
able to find a matching TTP gets to be the sucker who pays all the miner
fees at once, because he is the only one who actually needs their services.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150212/e2f3ae22/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:>
> 1. They won't be attacking Bitcoin, they will attack merchants who accept
> payments with 0 confirmations.
>
Which is basically all of them other than exchanges. Any merchant that uses
BitPay or Coinbase, for instance, or any physical shop.
If you want to play word games and redefine "Bitcoin" to be something other
than what people are actually using, go right ahead. You will win the
argument under your own definitions which nobody else is using.
In your scenario I won't be able to get hamburgers for free because people
will stop selling them for ordinary bitcoin transactions. Most will say,
you know what, just pay me with Visa instead. And a few might knuckle down
and set up some network of PKI-like trusted third parties that interacts
with the block chain in some way.
Though eventually, if that were to happen, cunning merchants will notice
that having received a transaction counter-signed by a TTP they don't
actually have to broadcast it or pay miner fees at all. They can just keep
it around in their wallet and pass it along to the next guy when they
purchase something with those coins. Eventually whoever ends up not being
able to find a matching TTP gets to be the sucker who pays all the miner
fees at once, because he is the only one who actually needs their services.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150212/e2f3ae22/attachment.html>;