|
Omnivion
|
 |
June 19, 2014, 10:43:51 PM |
|
Thanks! Or maybe you want to buy a rare Magic the Gathering card, but don't trust the Online eXchange. You find someone who will sell the card for 200 BlackCoins, but neither of you are comfortable sending to the other person first in case it's a scam.
You create a BlackHalo contract and both deposit 300 BlackCoins each - you each hold one of the keys to this money. They send your card to your safe deposit box, you send the BlackCoins to their address, and once you're both satisfied that everything is fine, you sign the contract transaction and both parties receive their 300 BC deposit back.
If I'm buying the Magic the Gathering card, and receive the card, but claim that I didn't, the following happens: I will get the card (+200), but lose the deposit (-300) => total -100 The seller will lose the card (-200) and lose the deposit (-300) => total -500 Is this correct? What will happen to the deposits (total of 600) ? No one else knows that I have actually received the card even though I'm saying I haven't. Yes, that is correct. If the buyer/seller never reach agreement, no one will get their money back. The coins would essentially be destroyed. (At least for this simple contract.) You could structure the agreement differently, for example, the seller of the card deposits 100, the buyer deposits 300, and once the contract is completed, it will send 300 BC to the seller and 100 BC to the buyer. Once the contract is setup, the seller sends the card and signs the contract transaction (he has no reason not to.) Once the card is received, the buyer also signs the transaction, and the payment will be received. (There's no way to keep the total value at risk always equal between the two parties, because this changes as soon as the card is sent.) I just chose the larger numbers to illustrate that the cost of breaking the contract should be greater than not doing so. Because the BlackCoin market is currently somewhat volatile, the higher amount reduces the chance of a backout due to market price falling. You'll be able to choose whatever escrow amounts are desired to balance ensuring you won't get scammed vs not placing more than needed into the escrow address. (And some types of transactions can be broken into multiple steps to further minimize the escrow requirement.) |
Blockchain for Apps | Blockchain for Business | Blockchain for Future |
|
|
|
cryptoangel
|
|
June 19, 2014, 11:08:29 PM |
|
Yes, that is correct. If the buyer/seller never reach agreement, no one will get their money back. The coins would essentially be destroyed. (At least for this simple contract.) Is this some kind of joke ?. You could possible lose thousands of BC on a trade if it went wrong?. |
|
|
|
|
sgi02
|
|
June 19, 2014, 11:11:57 PM |
|
The best is yet to come. Speculate on price all you want, this coin is solid. If you're working on trading strategies from information in this thread then you need to rethink your game plan. The landscape of BC will change significantly by the end of the year, I hope to see all of you when we get there!
|
|
|
|
|
|
cryptoangel
|
|
June 19, 2014, 11:14:56 PM |
|
The best is yet to come. Speculate on price all you want, this coin is solid. If you're working on trading strategies from information in this thread then you need to rethink your game plan. The landscape of BC will change significantly by the end of the year, I hope to see all of you when we get there!
You will see my 2000 lambo before you see me!  . |
|
|
|
|
blade87
|
|
June 19, 2014, 11:50:12 PM
Last edit: June 20, 2014, 12:41:56 AM by blade87 |
|
Once more big thx to Mintpal for killing another BC uptrend with another shitcoin ninja launch. What would have been a correction turned into another dumpfest....
We need to get rid of this shithole of an exchange, seriously.
+1 Well, BlackHalo means we won't actually need a centralized exchange anymore. But, it would still be nice to get on BTC-e one day. I'd honestly rather not have the fine details out before the release. "Buy the rumors and sell the news" (or innovation in the case of BlackCoin). It's happened on BC a few too many times now. |
|
|
|
|
|
Omnivion
|
|
June 20, 2014, 12:04:07 AM |
|
Yes, that is correct. If the buyer/seller never reach agreement, no one will get their money back. The coins would essentially be destroyed. (At least for this simple contract.) Is this some kind of joke ?. You could possible lose thousands of BC on a trade if it went wrong?. Well, assuming my understanding is correct, yes. But the idea of it is that this should be a very rare event - not many people would decide to do the equivalent of lighting hundreds of dollars on fire. That's one of the simplest versions of the contract. You could also set up a contract to allow arbitration I believe (though that requires trusting that the arbiter and other party won't collude against you.) You set up a multi-sig account that requires 2 of 3 keys to send, and if you can't agree, the arbiter could step in for a fee. The arbiter could set up his service to use a standard fee/agreement, and you may not need to contact or pay the arbiter anything unless he is needed. This version isn't as trustless as the original though. |
Blockchain for Apps | Blockchain for Business | Blockchain for Future |
|
|
|
virtualfaqs
|
|
June 20, 2014, 12:41:20 AM |
|
Yes, that is correct. If the buyer/seller never reach agreement, no one will get their money back. The coins would essentially be destroyed. (At least for this simple contract.) Is this some kind of joke ?. You could possible lose thousands of BC on a trade if it went wrong?. Well, assuming my understanding is correct, yes. But the idea of it is that this should be a very rare event - not many people would decide to do the equivalent of lighting hundreds of dollars on fire. That's one of the simplest versions of the contract. You could also set up a contract to allow arbitration I believe (though that requires trusting that the arbiter and other party won't collude against you.) You set up a multi-sig account that requires 2 of 3 keys to send, and if you can't agree, the arbiter could step in for a fee. The arbiter could set up his service to use a standard fee/agreement, and you may not need to contact or pay the arbiter anything unless he is needed. This version isn't as trustless as the original though. Not sure if I'm reading the correct part. But I read somewhere about using divisible currencies to trade little bits until they all correspond to the whole and trade? So if you do get scammed, you lose a tiny bit. Otherwise the other party loses just as much as you. Same trust system that's based on staking. If you screw the system, you stand to lose it all. Am I understanding this correctly? Certainly better arrangement then 1 party gets everything first. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Omnivion
|
|
June 20, 2014, 01:11:23 AM |
|
Yes, that is correct. If the buyer/seller never reach agreement, no one will get their money back. The coins would essentially be destroyed. (At least for this simple contract.) Is this some kind of joke ?. You could possible lose thousands of BC on a trade if it went wrong?. Well, assuming my understanding is correct, yes. But the idea of it is that this should be a very rare event - not many people would decide to do the equivalent of lighting hundreds of dollars on fire. That's one of the simplest versions of the contract. You could also set up a contract to allow arbitration I believe (though that requires trusting that the arbiter and other party won't collude against you.) You set up a multi-sig account that requires 2 of 3 keys to send, and if you can't agree, the arbiter could step in for a fee. The arbiter could set up his service to use a standard fee/agreement, and you may not need to contact or pay the arbiter anything unless he is needed. This version isn't as trustless as the original though. Not sure if I'm reading the correct part. But I read somewhere about using divisible currencies to trade little bits until they all correspond to the whole and trade? So if you do get scammed, you lose a tiny bit. Otherwise the other party loses just as much as you. Same trust system that's based on staking. If you screw the system, you stand to lose it all. Am I understanding this correctly? Certainly better arrangement then 1 party gets everything first. Yeah, something to do with micro-payment channels or repeatable contracts was mentioned at some point, though I don't know the details. But that only works with divisible items on both sides of the trade, like one currency for another. I think we'll start to get a better feel for what sort of things are possible when people actually get a chance to try it out for themselves. Another use-case that may appeal to some people: decentralized sports betting (no fee/vig/house %). |
Blockchain for Apps | Blockchain for Business | Blockchain for Future |
|
|
alison03
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
★Trash&Burn [TBC/TXB]★
|
|
June 20, 2014, 02:46:39 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xtrm
|
|
June 20, 2014, 02:58:58 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? |
|
|
|
|
|
hardcoreprime
|
|
June 20, 2014, 03:02:33 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? If this is real, then why is the price of blackcoin so cheap? |
|
|
|
Dr_Rig
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 20
Merit: 0
|
|
June 20, 2014, 03:19:52 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? If this is real, then why is the price of blackcoin so cheap? This could be the last train to buy BC cheap. |
|
|
|
|
alison03
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
★Trash&Burn [TBC/TXB]★
|
|
June 20, 2014, 03:27:32 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? If this is real, then why is the price of blackcoin so cheap? There's no question on if it's real.  I think there are many reasons for low prices - BTC just had a major shakedown which in turn tanked almost every alt, fickle traders just trying to get in on the 'newest' pump and dump (today Mintpal ninja launched Cloak just as we were rising...people dumped BC and started pumping Cloak), daytraders that bought in when BC dropped to the teens are cashing out because they are happy with their profits, and on and on. It'll rise soon enough - this coin is resilient and has too much support and innovation to ever fail. Even after that artificial pump, it never fell below where it started. Remember it was trading at 500-1000 sats earlier this year. People will realize the fundamentals of blackcoin are solid - not like any of the clone coins or p&d coins or scam coins...we are here to stay. |
|
|
|
|
|
Subtuppel
|
|
June 20, 2014, 04:14:59 AM
Last edit: June 20, 2014, 07:09:58 AM by Subtuppel |
|
weirdo.
this has to be the first time that i woke up (CET time zone) and the price had been rising over night in now almost 2 months.
|
|
|
|
alison03
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
★Trash&Burn [TBC/TXB]★
|
|
June 20, 2014, 06:54:44 AM |
|
Just saw this posted by Assembloid on Reddit:
18% of blackcoin's volume, according to coinmarketcap, is on btc38. Looks like China is taking notice!!
MintPal BC/BTC $ 638,108 $ 0.150498 64.38 %
BTC38 BC/CNY $ 178,583 $ 0.159301 18.02 %
Cryptsy BC/BTC $ 121,062 $ 0.153825 12.21 %
|
|
|
|
|
|
arieq
|
|
June 20, 2014, 07:35:08 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? If this is real, then why is the price of blackcoin so cheap? This could be the last train to buy BC cheap. Just bought 1000k more, next stop will be at 40k in the next 2 or 3 days, time to panic buy... |
|
|
|
Razkin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0
|
|
June 20, 2014, 07:40:34 AM |
|
How soon will this implementation be complete? If this is real, then why is the price of blackcoin so cheap? This could be the last train to buy BC cheap. Just bought 1000k more, next stop will be at 40k in the next 2 or 3 days, time to panic buy... 1000k  pics or it didn't happen |
|
|
|
|
|
