[Lucrative-L] lucrative accounts revisited
Tim May
timcmay at got.net
Thu Apr 24 12:24:57 PDT 2003
On Thursday, April 24, 2003, at 10:57 AM, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
> At 11:09 AM -0400 4/24/03, Patrick Chkoreff wrote:
>> I expect my scheme will be slapped down
>> forthwith. :-)
>
> <Baff-Baff> :-)
>
> Again, the *only* thing you need to prevent double-spending is a copy
> of the spent coins. Period.
>
> Anything else costs money.
For on-line clearing, a copy of the spent "coin" stops double-spending.
I would not call it a "coin," however. We should reserve the word
"coin" for things which behave like coins, e.g, things that clear
locally without presentation to an issuer or other entity.
For off-line clearing, double-spending is a significant and hard
problem. Perhaps unsolvable.
If so, then there are no digital coins and never will be.
(I don't count token-based systems, using smartcards or "observers," as
digital coins.)
Everything connected with money costs money, by the way. Even keeping
copies and comparing them to newly-presented exemplars.
--Tim May
"The great object is that every man be armed and everyone who is able
may have a gun." --Patrick Henry
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they
be properly armed." --Alexander Hamilton
More information about the Testlist
mailing list