Author: Cameron Hejazi 2015-06-20 17:38:50
Published on: 2015-06-20T17:38:50+00:00
The discussion started with an analogy of using stolen credit cards or fake bills to buy coffee from a local store. The point being made was that it's not worth the risk of being caught for such a small transaction, and the store can deal with a small percentage of transactions getting reversed or having a fake bill. These analogies were being brought up in the context of quick payments, which is different from the goal of Bitcoin, i.e., cryptographically sound, distributed consensus. The writer also mentioned that perfection is not necessary in all situations.The focus then shifted to zeroconf transactions, which currently have no sound solution in Bitcoin. The writer suggested that supporting this goal should not be a part of the agenda until a solution is found. There are two paths going forward that could achieve the goal of quick payments for small transactions like buying coffee - research/implement a solution that is consistent with the goal of Bitcoin or rely on a cosigning central authority.Finally, the writer cautioned against relying on the good faith of people, as they can be just as nasty as corporations.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T23:53:51.428659+00:00