blob: c81d40ad72725b1d08d8ad4e35890382b32ae402 (
plain)
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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <cryptocurrencies@quidecco.de>) id 1WxTJu-0006Yp-Vz
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 03:47:27 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from quidecco.de ([81.169.136.15])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WxTJs-0004aQ-5q
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 03:47:26 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by quidecco.de (Postfix) with SMTP id 71C3ADFD05D;
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 05:47:17 +0200 (CEST)
From: Isidor Zeuner <cryptocurrencies@quidecco.de>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= <jtimon@monetize.io>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
References: <CAC1+kJNTpHpG5EpRKj21PEy3z2iAouuH6Yiix8m20uji3b6Lgg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0fjzuUKh0Jmk9c99ne81hdxZdTnhw6sq47Na7AC4n04A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC1+kJNTpHpG5EpRKj21PEy3z2iAouuH6Yiix8m20uji3b6Lgg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <20140619034717.71C3ADFD05D@quidecco.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 05:47:17 +0200 (CEST)
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1WxTJs-0004aQ-5q
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0 confirmation txs using replace-by-fee
and game theory
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, 19 Jun 2014 03:47:27 -0000
quote:
[...]
> On 4/24/14, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It would work but it's an ugly hack IMO. What do people do if they don't
> > have extra to pay when making a purchase? I have 200 mbtc and want to buy a
> > 200 mbtc phone but I can't because I need 400 mbtc. Sucks for me.
> >
> > I would much prefer the hassle of a green address notary than always having
> > to make sure I have double what I need to make a purchase.
>
> This scheme wouldn't be mandatory. You can still wait for
> confirmations or rely somehow on existing trust instead if that's
> better for you on that situation.
>
Considering hotel or car rental payments where the credit card
processor reserves a higher amount in order to cover risks, it
doesn't seem like anything new or particularly inconvenient that a
payment system may require a larger amount than the final price being
available.
Which brings us to the question: Is it an important characteristic in
a payment system that it is capable of quickly spending your last
penny?
Best regards,
Isidor
|
