at 11:30 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
Damn it. I broke that one way, and then my fix broke it another way.
You are referring, I presume, to the fact that one doesn't need to
consent to create a promise?
Yeah.
At least I can't think of a situation where that's exploitable
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 11:20 PM omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> at 11:06 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> > I think that having single-party contracts feels / is safer. You can
> > arbitrarily amend it without needing to rely on anyone else and nobody else
> > can join it
at 11:06 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion
wrote:
I think that having single-party contracts feels / is safer. You can
arbitrarily amend it without needing to rely on anyone else and nobody else
can join it which adds another layer of speculative protection.
I don’t think single-party
I think that having single-party contracts feels / is safer. You can
arbitrarily amend it without needing to rely on anyone else and nobody else
can join it which adds another layer of speculative protection.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 12:03 AM ATMunn via agora-business <
On 7/7/20 6:02 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> When a person transfers any number of assets to this contract, those
> assets are considered to be in eir account. A party to this contract CAN
> transfer any number of assets from eir account to emself. Attempts to
> transfer more assets to
5 matches
Mail list logo
