Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WxFsA-0004b1-TC
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:25:54 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.219.52 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.219.52; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-oa0-f52.google.com; 
Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.219.52])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WxFs9-0005Vh-V2
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:25:54 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id j17so1729732oag.25
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.70.200 with SMTP id o8mr1855514oeu.55.1403097948251; Wed,
	18 Jun 2014 06:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.71.162 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <loom.20140618T140509-802@post.gmane.org>
References: <CAKrJrGOBSiY5V59eko6g796j3wh9V9ZLjPbyHeS5=zyX6j3Wdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<lnhgsk$va6$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<loom.20140615T111027-736@post.gmane.org>
	<lnk4ii$ehf$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<loom.20140618T140509-802@post.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:25:48 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: d7Da-Jq0nJyqwwNBG7E5aTAqXT0
Message-ID: <CANEZrP0ekAHNOHha_8ncu_QKVCidBQndw2x0+5rciD92LdOS7A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Lawrence Nahum <lawrence@greenaddress.it>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11334460ca6e2104fc1c32d0
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: 1WxFs9-0005Vh-V2
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] instant confirmation via payment protocol
 backwards compatible proto buffer extension
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: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:25:55 -0000

--001a11334460ca6e2104fc1c32d0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> - allowing multiple signatures ?


I'm not sure this is actually important or useful; trusting someone not to
double spend is a pretty binary thing. I'm not sure saying "you need to get
three independent parties to sign off on this" is worth the hassle,
especially because the first signature is obvious (your risk analysis
provider or hardware) but the second and third are ..... who? Special
purpose services you have to sign up for? Seems like a hassle.

But it's up to you.

--001a11334460ca6e2104fc1c32d0
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">- allowing multiple signatures ?</blockquote><di=
v><br></div>
<div>I&#39;m not sure this is actually important or useful; trusting someon=
e not to double spend is a pretty binary thing. I&#39;m not sure saying &qu=
ot;you need to get three independent parties to sign off on this&quot; is w=
orth the hassle, especially because the first signature is obvious (your ri=
sk analysis provider or hardware) but the second and third are ..... who? S=
pecial purpose services you have to sign up for? Seems like a hassle.</div>
<div><br></div><div>But it&#39;s up to you.</div></div></div></div>

--001a11334460ca6e2104fc1c32d0--