This would revive many of the things people have aspired to kill with
bitcoins. Among others the creation of money (I can borrow and store
more money than I have). It would also mean moving the scalability problem
to a centralized system, a trusted party.
In other words: wouldn't having money
Hey Guys -
Watching the other OTR thread, what destroyed OTR's deniability
property for Manning? If Manning's machine was logging (does anyone
even know?), I would expect the logs to be the culprit. But if only
Lamo's machine had logs, would the property still hold (as Marsh said,
there are a
On 2011-07-20, Ian G wrote:
To answer OP, typically all trading is done on a delayed and netted
settlement. Which is to say the trade might be done real time but the
settlement is batched for later, typically after market closing. No
money changes hands until later. This is especially true as
On 2011-07-20 7:09 AM, Ian G wrote:
Part of the problem I have semantically with OTR is that it isn't OTR.
The presence of a record means it is on the record. While
OTR-the-product might be attempting to decrease the tamper-resistance
qualities of the document, there is manifestly a document.
James A. Donald
The obvious next step is to have chaumian money and
account money which has rapid low cost transactions, which
money is converted into bitcoins at leisure, analogous to
having gold, and account money and banknotes backed by
gold.
On 2011-07-20 3:25 AM, lodewijk andré de la
