[Withdraw MtGox] We should tie up MtGox's hands after MultiSig is implemented.

[Litt]

If you are going to publicly make accusations about a company that can harm their reputation, you best present some solid evidence. If I were running MtGox, I would take some time to trying find your identity and file a suit just to teach you a lesson. This is borderline criminal directly trying to tarnish a reputation of a company. You can tell the judge that you were pretty sure about it and see how that goes.

MagicalTux has already answered questions about trading within his own exchange before on irc multiple times and stated that he does not do this. So far, MtGox has given me no reason not to trust their claims.

[1713424789]

1713424789

[1713424789]

1713424789

[iddo]

I suggest after MultiSig is implemented,
we should force MtGox to store coins in the MultiSig Address that can only be spend with our agreement.

Huh? You deposit bitcoins, trade them for dollars, withdraw the dollars, and the person who received those bitcoins on the other side of that trade will need your agreement if he wishes to withdraw those bitcoins? Would you also need to seek the agreement of the specific person who deposited the dollars before you could withdraw them? How would that work? You can do MultiSig contract if both sides already have bitcoins as collateral, but the whole point of an exchange like MtGox is that someone who has only dollars could trade them for bitcoins.

[BTCurious]

Huh? You deposit bitcoins, trade them for dollars, withdraw the dollars, and the person who received those bitcoins on the other side of that trade will need your agreement if he wishes to withdraw those bitcoins?

What he means is, when the trade is made, mtgox would need your permission to do the actual trade. The bitcoins would then go into a new joint custody of mtgox and the guy who just bought them from you.

[iddo]

What he means is, when the trade is made, mtgox would need your permission to do the actual trade. The bitcoins would then go into a new joint custody of mtgox and the guy who just bought them from you.

Ahh right, I see what he meant. Though if that's case, what's the benefit of mtgox having custody over the traded bitcoins? If we could fill all the missing details in this scenario (we cannot because that's not how real-time exchanges work) then giving control over the bitcoins just to the guy who bought them seems to be enough, and joint control with mtgox would be useless?

[BTCurious]

People would still be able to deposit USD at mtgox, and mtgox would make sure that your account gets the USD when you sell your bitcoins.
So on the one hand, you don't need to trust the other party you're selling to to actually deliver the USD, and on the other hand you don't have to trust MtGox about running off with your bitcoins (or doing fractional reserve banking with them).

Problems:
You still have to trust MtGox with your USD, and they can still do FRB with those.
Either trades aren't real time anymore, or you need to run an MtGox client that knows what you want to trade, and only signs those transactions that make a trade you want. When you don't have the client running, trades could not be made.

[iddo]

Right, you're simply describing mtgox acting as escrow, but I was interested in whether multisign is useful? As far as I can see, multisign is completely useless in the scenario that we're describing, because it's better (both for mtgox and for the guy who receives the traded bitcoins) that mtgox wouldn't have any control over the address that received the traded bitcoins. Both sides of the trade have to trust mtgox to carry out the exchange between the right destinations anyway, and after the trade is done there's no point in having joint custody.

[benjamindees]

Bump for history lesson...