Is there anything to stop users (or a single person with two emails) from sending money to each other over and over again to abuse the "one lucky user" system?
Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
31–40 of 48 posts
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#32Fun fact: a service like this is illegal in the USA without a money transmitter license (which costs around $1mm per state) in each state in which you send or receive money. There are additional regulatory requirements demanding that you collect the identity of each person you send to or receive from. Liberty Reserve learned this the hard way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Reserve This is one of the reasons c…
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#33IMO this is kind of the worst of both worlds: - It's centralized: so all the issues that come with that, plus the authority is some random person somewhere, rather than the european central bank or something like that. And people die and individual computers catch on fire and get hacked. - It's a new digital currency: so it's completely useless as of today. I'd consider it way more likely that I'll get hit by a meteo…
They always seem to popup whenever crypto becomes sexy again. This one is just a little bit more deadpan than others.
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
2 reasons 1) Accountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible 2) Extensibility - By having all transactions public, it's much easier to build integrations on top of CC
Accountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible Your structure isn't a blockchain though. Transaction 0 does not indicate where the original coin value came from (there was no "minting" transaction). So users can't actually verify double spends.
Then you can verify double spends
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Accountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible Your structure isn't a blockchain though. Transaction 0 does not indicate where the original coin value came from (there was no "minting" transaction). So users can't actually verify double spends.
If you assume that 9447ffe1633c73206d9e775762fae7c5e6f3a926ba83f862c2774491d53a3a4b has infinity coins (which it effectively does) Then you can verify double spends
If you know that, and your users know that, why not just keep transactions private like PayPal.
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#36It’s not meant to be the method of value exchange of the future, but I bet it was a cool project to work on.
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#37Are you planning on offering CC as a payment method for flurly.com? If so, only as a cash-out or also as a payment method? It’s not meant to be the method of value exchange of the future, but I bet it was a cool project to work on.
Re: Show HN: Centralized Coin – A Centralized Coin
#38Hi everyone, My main project is an online digital goods marketplace called flurly.com, and I’ve learned how hard it is to pay people globally. If Stripe/Paypal doesn’t exist in your country you’re basically out of luck. Coinbase is a great first step, but the platform has high instead of low fees, and people save coins instead of spending coins. I wanted to build a globally accessible, low cost way of facilitating pa…
Did you consider doing it as Chaumian-style cash[0] and if so, what made you decide against it? [0]: https://medium.com/@chamirachid/on-blind-signatures-for-untr...