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; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
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
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Instant / contactless payments
Precedence: list

--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">&lt;<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:mike@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>&gt;</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&#39;re gett=
ing into the area that I said &quot;rapidly got very complicated&quot;.</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&#39;t have reputation on their own, so their review =
of you as a payer isn&#39;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&#39;t impact Alice. But if Carol thinks Eve is good, =
Carol thinks Bob is good too, so Bob&#39;s reputation is different based on=
 who&#39;s asking, and it&#39;s the responsibility of the individual member=
s to maintain their own good/bad user lists. Would you think that&#39;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--