From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YN6vY-0003Tl-KQ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:40:32 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.178; envelope-from=ekaggata@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f178.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f178.google.com ([74.125.82.178]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YN6vX-000187-QE for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:40:32 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id w62so25917957wes.9 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:40:25 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.79.226 with SMTP id m2mr43241833wjx.60.1424036425654; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:40:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.0.54] (nl4x.mullvad.net. [95.211.148.154]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id a13sm19903228wjx.30.2015.02.15.13.40.24 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:40:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54E11248.6090401@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 23:40:24 +0200 From: Adam Gibson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20150212064719.GA6563@savin.petertodd.org> <20150215212512.GR14804@nl.grid.coop> In-Reply-To: <20150215212512.GR14804@nl.grid.coop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 (ekaggata[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1YN6vX-000187-QE Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] replace-by-fee v0.10.0rc4 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: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:40:32 -0000 On 02/15/2015 11:25 PM, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > > Most money/payment systems include some method to reverse or undo > payments made in error. In these systems, the longer settlement > times you mention below are a feature, not a bug, and give more > time for a human to react to errors and system failures. > Settlement has to be final somewhere. That is the whole point of it. Transfer costs in current electronic payment systems are a direct consequence of their non-finality. That's the point Satoshi was making in the introduction to the whitepaper: "With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads". There is nothing wrong with having reversible mechanisms built on top of Bitcoin, and indeed it makes sense for most activity to happen at those higher layers. It's easy to build things that way, but impossible to build them the other way: you can't build a non-reversible layer on top of a reversible layer.