1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <boydb@midnightdesign.ws>) id 1WLcuH-0002nR-2I
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:20:33 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of
midnightdesign.ws designates 50.87.144.70 as permitted sender)
client-ip=50.87.144.70; envelope-from=boydb@midnightdesign.ws;
helo=gator3054.hostgator.com;
Received: from gator3054.hostgator.com ([50.87.144.70])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WLcuG-00032k-5Y
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:20:33 +0000
Received: from [74.125.82.176] (port=44708 helo=mail-we0-f176.google.com)
by gator3054.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <boydb@midnightdesign.ws>)
id 1WLcu9-0006vS-Rv for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 12:20:26 -0600
Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id x48so3509606wes.7
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:20:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=H7hlToP/h4nDXIL6cISwqe12T5a22zufs2fTh+1nklQ=;
b=IM/902xuey37tgQ/mK4OJWmH7h3JyFhWGHfQNAQDECwm0wYCYZ7Wpk2ZuzkGQD8iSM
GJlZ6wBddnq7L1n8Y33uiJbtEsQEZckGMRaQKgYHIK61jLE0sjG6YS79FQvDkyPeA1gw
wlpXsh/iCfQhKk71PwIxSe/5R25dT5pZnRWqj56i0HEm5AqXK6DFbOmbmcXc1H0GK7YF
ZoWSqAFVAJF2rN/+Ju3FpiEfVya3GN2S+1bkS6jSpGF3Brcc4+ajlvnmlXl9BTAA9r68
qYKB7w2C94jzDp3SCE5G/NtZhJ/YsvdF+VxBDddgcbVnV8idgBd04i7DLnlCRXIjICA8
k9ow==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlm7zmGpf3BY1/vyzzxqk6+AVftFp7tJqqDM9c90JMIwhtRNs5UUDhYX+3bQpLkSGReUoEk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.234.106 with SMTP id ud10mr12808080wjc.0.1394130024089;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:20:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.71.71 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:20:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3pD2c-UFUZZAJAXBFTynx5Vusdw7As6O3RYuix3mMXDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP3w9c_UX3dd+7LdWNXCEwjnAG+bYWxqKYo_fzakWQu=Bg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANg-TZBv0zT6PywWJwug0DtzhQkXeE+9nMY14xKAfCysGfgkFg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP38p5O+GJ0AsFUHzfuXpR=Z0m2YCZiOy0nFd8jZFuE64A@mail.gmail.com>
<CANg-TZBoafXj6AiNGiT63BfX3iJYo5P3Vdmvxi+RuCODcrh0+w@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP3pD2c-UFUZZAJAXBFTynx5Vusdw7As6O3RYuix3mMXDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 12:20:24 -0600
Message-ID: <CANg-TZCAriYNbcA90YxKy6fRaioJ=0E18EcxAm0A6DssWkRrnw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brooks Boyd <boydb@midnightdesign.ws>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01494078db5ddb04f3f4306d
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator3054.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.sourceforge.net
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - midnightdesign.ws
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 74.125.82.176
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: (mail-we0-f176.google.com) [74.125.82.176]:44708
X-Source-Auth: midnight
X-Email-Count: 3
X-Source-Cap: bWlkbmlnaHQ7bWlkbmlnaHQ7Z2F0b3IzMDU0Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Headers-End: 1WLcuG-00032k-5Y
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Instant / contactless payments
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:20:33 -0000
--089e01494078db5ddb04f3f4306d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> If there was a way for a Bitcoin user to provide feedback on a payment
>> (ECDSA signature from one of the addresses involved in the payment, signing
>> an identifier of the payment and a feedback score)
>>
>
> Well now you're getting into the area that I said "rapidly got very
> complicated".
>
> Define bitcoin user? What stops me paying myself to accrue positive
> reputation? Etc.
>
Yes, I could see how that could get hairy; it would also need some ability
to rate those giving the feedback, such that if you generate a whole bunch
of payments to yourself, those payees don't have reputation on their own,
so their review of you as a payer isn't weighted that highly. Then you have
that ring-of-trust possibility where Alice thinks Eve is bad, so the fact
that Eve thinks Bob is good doesn't impact Alice. But if Carol thinks Eve
is good, Carol thinks Bob is good too, so Bob's reputation is different
based on who's asking, and it's the responsibility of the individual
members to maintain their own good/bad user lists. Would you think that's a
good thing or a bad thing to give the individual players that level of
control/responsibility?
--089e01494078db5ddb04f3f4306d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
hu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>></span> wrot=
e:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-l=
eft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div=
class=3D""><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bo=
rder-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra">
If there was a way for a Bitcoin user to provide feedback on a payment (ECD=
SA signature from one of the addresses involved in the payment, signing an =
identifier of the payment and a feedback score)</div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Well now you're gett=
ing into the area that I said "rapidly got very complicated".</di=
v><div><br></div><div>Define bitcoin user? What stops me paying myself to a=
ccrue positive reputation? Etc.</div>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Yes, I could see ho=
w that could get hairy; it would also need some ability to rate those givin=
g the feedback, such that if you generate a whole bunch of payments to your=
self, those payees don't have reputation on their own, so their review =
of you as a payer isn't weighted that highly. Then you have that ring-o=
f-trust possibility where Alice thinks Eve is bad, so the fact that Eve thi=
nks Bob is good doesn't impact Alice. But if Carol thinks Eve is good, =
Carol thinks Bob is good too, so Bob's reputation is different based on=
who's asking, and it's the responsibility of the individual member=
s to maintain their own good/bad user lists. Would you think that's a g=
ood thing or a bad thing to give the individual players that level of contr=
ol/responsibility?</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div></div>
--089e01494078db5ddb04f3f4306d--
|
