Author: justusranvier at riseup.net 2015-06-19 16:44:08
Published on: 2015-06-19T16:44:08+00:00
In a PGP signed message, Matt Whitlock questions the assumption of fraud by default in regards to double-spending. He argues that without information one way or another, no assumptions should be made about the fraudulence or non-fraudulence of any given double-spend. In response, justusranvier at riseup.net argues that if there is ECDSA proof that an entity intentionally made and publicly announced incompatible promises regarding the disposition of particular Bitcoins under their control, then it should be assumed to be a fraud attempt unless shown otherwise. They also note that there are ways of achieving transaction fee adjustment after broadcast that do not present the appearance of, or opportunity for, fraud.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T23:51:58.651625+00:00