From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WJCP5-0007lC-2a for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:38:19 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.102 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.102; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148102.authsmtp.net; Received: from outmail148102.authsmtp.net ([62.13.148.102]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1WJCP3-0000F3-Of for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:38:19 +0000 Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235]) by punt14.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s1S1bc22074844; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:37:38 GMT Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s1S1bXvD066937 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:37:36 GMT Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 20:37:19 -0500 From: Peter Todd To: Jorge =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tim=F3n?= Message-ID: <20140228013719.GA5786@savin> References: <20140209180458.GB20126@savin> <20140209204434.GA11488@savin> <20140210193247.GC17359@savin> <20140211175919.GV3180@nl.grid.coop> <20140214052159.GF31437@savin> <20140217054751.GY3180@nl.grid.coop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Server-Quench: e76439c1-a018-11e3-b802-002590a15da7 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAoUHlAWAgsB AmIbW1VeU1p7WmQ7 bAxPbAVDY01GQQRq WVdMSlVNFUsrAH8A VHZYJhl0cQxFfzBx bUFmVj4OW0J+dk8u Q1MFFWwOeGZhPWMC AkhYdR5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhES HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4nEzUx QQwYFDEuD0AJDyky IB06I1pUFV0KP1l6 PEsqWVsePBJaFQxC HyMFAChfKkIdDzIx DAhbW0FWGTtRCSJV GB4lPldEDyROWkIA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) 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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1WJCP3-0000F3-Of Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Decentralized digital asset exchange with honest pricing and market depth X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:38:19 -0000 --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:48:33AM +0100, Jorge Tim=F3n wrote: > First of all, sorry for the delayed answer. >=20 > On 2/10/14, Peter Todd wrote: > > Got this: > [...] > Thank you, I knew this wasn't new for us but I doubted we had written > it anywhere. > As said in those mails, being only able to offer AAA for BTC and not > BTC for AAA nor AAA for BBB is enough of a limitation to justify a > hardfork IMO. As usual, you don't need a hardfork. Anyway, one-sided trade is sufficient to get a functioning marketplace up and running and test out the many other issues with this stuff prior to forking anything. > On 2/14/14, Peter Todd wrote: > > You're assuming the seller cares about fairness - why should they? They > > offered a price for an asset and someone bought it; exactly which buyer > > willing to buy at that price was able to complete the trade is > > irrelevant to them. What they do care about is being sure that at > > whatever given price they offered 100% of the buyers willing to buy at > > that price actually see the offer in a reasonable amount of time - at > > the best price the seller will get there will be only a single buyer > > after all so you need that solid proof that said buyer was actually able > > to get the offer. >=20 > In fact, I don't think the seller will care enough about this to pay > the proof of publication fee either. Assuming sellers can either > broadcast the order on a bitmessage-like network or use your proof of > publication scheme, the later will be always be more expensive. So my > prediction is that most people will just use the simplest, fastest and > cheapest method, but I guess only time can tell. You can make the same argument against Bitcoin itself you know... A Bitmessage-like network would be trivial to front-run via a sybil attack. It's the fundemental problem with marketplaces - the data they're trying to publish has to be public. > I don't think this will be a tragedy, because like we discussed on > IRC, I don't think the primary goal of markets is price discovery, but > trade itself. > > About historic data, the actual trades are always public, and some > kind of "archivers" could collect and maintain old orders for historic > bid and asks, etc. And again, how do you know that record is honest? Fact is without proof-of-publication you just don't. > As an aside, nLockTime would be nice not to always have to > double-spend the inputs of an order to cancel it. You mean a reverse nLockTime that makes a transaction invalid after a certain amount of time - that's dangerous in a reorg unfortunately as it can make transactions permenantly invalid. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 0000000000000000b52709f0485161e764ac0198960885ccab019a978322cc6e --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iQGrBAEBCACVBQJTD+hPXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDBiOTdhYjgzMWE1MzBhOWEwNGY1MDAwZWI1YTIzOWYwYjJm MzBiNmRkMDE2M2VkYTMvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQJIFAPaXwkfverQf6A4ae7LCT4wq3B7/R7ZXZy145 04KO9b+bO45hkw3FIqM7CS94gND7StvJeYzQHQ42DMl0bmYmQzONdNgL9zeDjgRY aGbLwiOkK4lRE3jVALbbluGExTv6T3iab3v0F0pqyQxXdm3C8GIfyu0t/j+k5Tul KHF5dcOb0LE4mvXohCeOzedg5f/h1i0n3qeqtUcgKdEQ9GpeaSjxoZj1w+qL17gE uRk3KI8MYPaaATWxnzFRIewy2popJA0t9ENbS2MoEsLeZD1cMrTiplP1IKzix8PO kv7abuZUmYdTRl5vpUvva6DrbAERXpd7JHfbz0K+DNEpAcGGzkrqODB+Hw2tAQ== =ymTa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o--