Re: Your source code, for sale

[Tyler Durden]

Oh, I assumed that this verification 'layer' was disjoint from the e$ layer. 
In other words, you might have a 3rd party e$ issuer, but after that they 
shouldn't be necessary....or, there's a different 3rd party for the 
verification process.

I think that's reasonable, but of course one could argue "what's the point 
if you already need a 3rd party for the e$". But I think that's a disjoint 
set of issues.

-TD
From: Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Your source code, for sale
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 11:50:28 +0000
Tyler Durden wrote:

What if I block the outbound "release the money" message after I
unbundle the images. Sure, I've already committed my money, but you
can't get to it. In effect I've just ripped you off, because I have
usable product and you don't have usable money.

Well, yes, but this would be a very significant step forward from the 
current situation. As t-->infinity the vast majority of non-payments are 
going to be for the purpose of greed. If the payment is already 'gone', 
then you need a whole different set of motives for wanting to screw 
somebody even if you get nothing out of it. So in other words, you have at 
least solved the payment problem "to the first order", with no 3rd party. 
With fancier mechanisms I would think you can solve it to 2nd order too.
How do you make the payment already "gone" without using a third party?
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/