From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WJAh0-0007Ep-2C for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 23:48:42 +0000 Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WJAgy-0004FD-4f for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 23:48:42 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e16so2000029lan.30 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:48:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Xwfo7GNPzjsEuCyImUYT6PXHSWFQTOZxaNoWu1H0CPs=; b=K7/CEtec5OfDDs5815HuW2iM9yQ7ARxsHZx21P8iiRco+OESK8pp+An1R7iL9GBgrG WkXt1wHvp74c46+22VCzT4UzxgXsxToz8r3KkrBkBKVXDqVfZy6P/E0YUeoFT03FP7Vx 0xAqbV6CWjkBRL0utcCFaBkwzB1uCJgMBAgESP8TKE5Qhelew+lC2fq6dQf02TUOLMWy rTe3llyR+H2GemDkYLWUoXPayD8GbNAUMGrrED8TquRBa00tgc9dK03zth3izhyhI1p0 JT4D0EBMtQdN0VnUbXku9iWD0KISL5+tmJfCJdVW39HmUgG5fiBsUAB2F34YtEPmpz74 Knjw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlvkqgPp9ZAUFBbTdoSyZWpzz4W/r55pvDh2atxwNYlMSgOHPyDkHL1uByRxxJ31KEhWMIM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.171.136 with SMTP id au8mr8221978lbc.0.1393544913430; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:48:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.62.136 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:48:33 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [108.193.6.130] In-Reply-To: <20140217054751.GY3180@nl.grid.coop> References: <20140209180458.GB20126@savin> <20140209204434.GA11488@savin> <20140210193247.GC17359@savin> <20140211175919.GV3180@nl.grid.coop> <20140214052159.GF31437@savin> <20140217054751.GY3180@nl.grid.coop> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:48:33 +0100 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= To: Troy Benjegerdes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1WJAgy-0004FD-4f 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: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 23:48:42 -0000 First of all, sorry for the delayed answer. 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. On 2/17/14, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > Is there a simple way to do cross-chain trades that doesn't need a third > chain to somehow facilitate things? These are the two methods I know for cross-chain trading (no third chain needed in any of them): https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts#Example_5:_Trading_across_chains https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D321228 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. 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. 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. As an aside, nLockTime would be nice not to always have to double-spend the inputs of an order to cancel it. --=20 Jorge Tim=F3n http://freico.in/