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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WLcxm-0000t7-Fi
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:24:10 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.220.170 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.220.170; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-vc0-f170.google.com;
Received: from mail-vc0-f170.google.com ([209.85.220.170])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WLcxl-0007T7-Py
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:24:10 +0000
Received: by mail-vc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id hu8so3007585vcb.15
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:24:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.53.8.166 with SMTP id dl6mr151079vdd.60.1394130244267; Thu,
06 Mar 2014 10:24:04 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.24.38 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:24:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANg-TZCAriYNbcA90YxKy6fRaioJ=0E18EcxAm0A6DssWkRrnw@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>
<CANg-TZCAriYNbcA90YxKy6fRaioJ=0E18EcxAm0A6DssWkRrnw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 19:24:04 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: MlvkmNc_A5vO8FE3sZC2W1ONAzk
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3DGOO_3pzew+EbcH+YcegbhSXjbTpKsp_vy6UZ2REDWw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Brooks Boyd <boydb@midnightdesign.ws>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133c8dcfb1c1404f3f43dfb
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WLcxl-0007T7-Py
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
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 18:24:10 -0000
--001a1133c8dcfb1c1404f3f43dfb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> 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?
>
If it's explicit, I think it's a non starter and nobody will bother with
it, especially not just for instant payments.
If it's just a case of "link your wallet with your Facebook account" and
requires no more effort than that, some people might, but of course the
user experience would be rather random. Hey why did that guy in front of me
get instant payments and I had to confirm even though we bought the same
things?
I'm not a big fan of UX's that appear totally random to the user.
--001a1133c8dcfb1c1404f3f43dfb
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">it&#=
39;s the responsibility of the individual members to maintain their own goo=
d/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?</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If it's explicit, I think it'=
;s a non starter and nobody will bother with it, especially not just for in=
stant payments.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>If it's just a case of &=
quot;link your wallet with your Facebook account" and requires no more=
effort than that, some people might, but of course the user experience wou=
ld be rather random. Hey why did that guy in front of me get instant paymen=
ts and I had to confirm even though we bought the same things?</div>
<div><br></div><div>I'm not a big fan of UX's that appear totally r=
andom to the user.</div></div></div></div>
--001a1133c8dcfb1c1404f3f43dfb--
|
