Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of riseup.net
	designates 198.252.153.129 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=198.252.153.129;
	envelope-from=justusranvier@riseup.net; helo=mx1.riseup.net; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:54:42 +0000
From: justusranvier@riseup.net
To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <83A7C606-B601-47D2-BE10-2A1412D97514@gmail.com>
References: <20150619103959.GA32315@savin.petertodd.org>
	<04CE3756-B032-464C-8FBD-7ACDD1A3197D@gmail.com>
	<812d8353e66637ec182da31bc0a9aac1@riseup.net>
	<1727885.UUNByX4Jyd@crushinator>
	<83A7C606-B601-47D2-BE10-2A1412D97514@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <380151fa41180b7501c4207009de6565@riseup.net>
User-Agent: Riseup mail
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee
Precedence: list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2015-06-19 16:42, Eric Lombrozo wrote:
> If we want a non-repudiation mechanism in the protocol, we should
> explicitly define one rather than relying on =E2=80=9Cprima facie=E2=80=
=9D
> assumptions. Otherwise, I would recommend not relying on the existence
> of a signed transaction as proof of intent to pay=E2=80=A6

Again, I'm not talking about any changes to the protocol. The mining=20
mechanism in the Bitcoin protocol is the fallback method of resolving=20
fraud that isn't prevented or resolved via other mechanisms.

There are plenty of other ways economic actors resolve their=20
disagreements other than blockchain adjudication. Sometimes when both=20
parties are identified and reside in the same legal jurisdiction,=20
contract violations and fraud can be adjudicated in courts. In some=20
situations, the parties involved may have access to private dispute=20
resolution techniques.

Sometimes the stakeholders in the network act to preserve the long term=20
value of their investments, even if it means passing short-term profits.=20
The more of those stakeholders there are in Bitcoin, the more effective=20
it is to make the case for choices that are long-term beneficial.

The degree to which anyone should rely on a signed transaction as=20
assurance of future payment is not a question with a universal answer.=20
It depends on the particular details of the situation, and the parties=20
involved, and their own risk tolerances and time preferences. There's no=20
right answer for everyone, which is why "let's break zeroconf because=20
*I* don't think it's safe enough" is a kind of vandalism.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=3Dx8eh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----