OpenBazaar - decentralized eBay

[itsAj]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

[knight22]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

[BitCoinDream]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

[master-P]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

I believe that other dark market sites have asked for a "bond" to be paid to the site that would be used to protect buyers from losses in the event they scammed early on. After a certain amount of time and after a certain amount of successful transactions then the bond would be returned to them as they now have a sufficient trust level to make their account worth enough to have an incentive to not scam. Also if a user's business were to turn out to not be very profitable then the user could "quit" and receive a refund on their "bond". With proof of burn it would not be possible to get your money back in the event that your business turns out to be unprofitable, or less profitable then anticipated.

[knight22]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

Who cares if people buy and sell reputations? It does not change the fact that there is very low incentive to crap on a good reputation you bought at high cost. It's not fool proof of course but it decrease significantly the risks of fraud.

[itsAj]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

This is a very good point. Reputation would essentially be something that could be freely traded. I would say that people will likely trust people with more bitcoin then their reputation is worth. You would also have the issue of blackmail. If one person is willing to risk their reputation then they could threaten to leave negative reputation to the other person unless something is done in their favor. I would argue that a person's reputation would only be valid until the first dispute comes up at which point it would likely be ruined even if they are in the right.

[knight22]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

This is a very good point. Reputation would essentially be something that could be freely traded. I would say that people will likely trust people with more bitcoin then their reputation is worth. You would also have the issue of blackmail. If one person is willing to risk their reputation then they could threaten to leave negative reputation to the other person unless something is done in their favor. I would argue that a person's reputation would only be valid until the first dispute comes up at which point it would likely be ruined even if they are in the right.

You people really should watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_iZvKw0IZU
Most of your points are being addressed.

Basically the reputation system for escrows will looks something like this; When a dispute has been done, both side vote for the escrow so if:

1. both give bad feed back = negative points
2. one good and one bad feed back = no point or neutral
3. both give good feed back = positive points.

So the system will give incentives for escrows to satisfy both party at once as much as possible.

Of course we don't really know how this will sort out but they will obviously adjust the pointing system according to the market behaviors.

Also, if buying and selling escrows' reputation becomes really a problem there will probably be a system for escrows to be able to prove their identities for those who don't mind. There are a lot of solutions to remove bad actors. It just depends on the market behaviors which is hard to predict precisely at that point. 

[Bitbirdhunt]

Looks interesting. How far are they from launch? Are there any major open problems/tasks or is it just finetuning at this point?
I can't really guess at what point they are based on the forum..

[knight22]

Looks interesting. How far are they from launch? Are there any major open problems/tasks or is it just finetuning at this point?
I can't really guess at what point they are based on the forum..

They just launched in beta a few days ago so they are sorting and fixing out bugs. Alpha version is planned for December first. The system is in its very early stages. I know there is still a lot of work and testing to do.

[itsAj]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

This is a very good point. Reputation would essentially be something that could be freely traded. I would say that people will likely trust people with more bitcoin then their reputation is worth. You would also have the issue of blackmail. If one person is willing to risk their reputation then they could threaten to leave negative reputation to the other person unless something is done in their favor. I would argue that a person's reputation would only be valid until the first dispute comes up at which point it would likely be ruined even if they are in the right.

You people really should watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_iZvKw0IZU
Most of your points are being addressed.

Basically the reputation system for escrows will looks something like this; When a dispute has been done, both side vote for the escrow so if:

1. both give bad feed back = negative points
2. one good and one bad feed back = no point or neutral
3. both give good feed back = positive points.

So the system will give incentives for escrows to satisfy both party at once as much as possible.

Of course we don't really know how this will sort out but they will obviously adjust the pointing system according to the market behaviors.

Also, if buying and selling escrows' reputation becomes really a problem there will probably be a system for escrows to be able to prove their identities for those who don't mind. There are a lot of solutions to remove bad actors. It just depends on the market behaviors which is hard to predict precisely at that point.

If escrow ever needs to get involved then it means that the end result will likely be that one party will be unhappy otherwise they would have worked something out on their own.

I would suggest that anytime (or at least the majority of the time) that the buyer and seller cannot resolve things on their own then one of them is trying to scam.

I am not so concerned that escrow would be purchased, but rather that an escrow could potentially be an alt of one of the parties to the transaction. This would mean that the escrow could resolve the transaction to their side and would vote for the escrow giving them a neutral rating.

[romerun]

I've yet be able.to load a merchant store , anybody knows why?

[knight22]

I've yet be able.to load a merchant store , anybody knows why?

http://www.reddit.com/r/openbazaar

[knight22]

When the trust comes into place decentralization lose its flavor. If it is about chosen escrow then either I'll do the trade on BitcoinTalk marketplace using a forum escrow or will use a eBay type site that is legacy centralized. When the volume of sell goes up, manual escrow system becomes obsolete.

Centralized escrow has proven to be vulnerable as there is one failure point where funds can be stolen by governments(silk Road) or either hackers or the black market operators(Too many examples to cite).


So what exactly is the problem with a reputation based arbitration market?

Because then reputation will be sold, like u see on BitcoinTalk. If u r not aware, check the Digital Goods section of this forum. Moreover, manual escrows are not a feasible solution for high trade volume.

This. Plus the fact that in the beginning no one will have any trust at all, so how will anyone know who is appropriate to trust?

By using proof-of-burn https://blog.openbazaar.org/proof-of-burn-and-reputation-pledges/

Can u please tell me the difference between Proof of Burn and Buying Reputation ? If reputation is bought, NOT earned, it'll also be SOLD... effectively jeopardizing the whole system. In a centralized marketplace like eBay, reputation is of highest importance to them because their reputation is not in competition within the system but outside of the system. In a de-centralized marketplace, the scenario will be different. Escrows are part of the free market supply-demand and hence reputation will itself become a commodity, leading to the formation of a reputation buying/selling system. A stable marketplace cant run like this... though I'm not sure about the black market dynamics.

This is a very good point. Reputation would essentially be something that could be freely traded. I would say that people will likely trust people with more bitcoin then their reputation is worth. You would also have the issue of blackmail. If one person is willing to risk their reputation then they could threaten to leave negative reputation to the other person unless something is done in their favor. I would argue that a person's reputation would only be valid until the first dispute comes up at which point it would likely be ruined even if they are in the right.

You people really should watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_iZvKw0IZU
Most of your points are being addressed.

Basically the reputation system for escrows will looks something like this; When a dispute has been done, both side vote for the escrow so if:

1. both give bad feed back = negative points
2. one good and one bad feed back = no point or neutral
3. both give good feed back = positive points.

So the system will give incentives for escrows to satisfy both party at once as much as possible.

Of course we don't really know how this will sort out but they will obviously adjust the pointing system according to the market behaviors.

Also, if buying and selling escrows' reputation becomes really a problem there will probably be a system for escrows to be able to prove their identities for those who don't mind. There are a lot of solutions to remove bad actors. It just depends on the market behaviors which is hard to predict precisely at that point.

If escrow ever needs to get involved then it means that the end result will likely be that one party will be unhappy otherwise they would have worked something out on their own.

I would suggest that anytime (or at least the majority of the time) that the buyer and seller cannot resolve things on their own then one of them is trying to scam.

I am not so concerned that escrow would be purchased, but rather that an escrow could potentially be an alt of one of the parties to the transaction. This would mean that the escrow could resolve the transaction to their side and would vote for the escrow giving them a neutral rating.

I'm having a really hard time to get how to do it in a decentralized market where escrows need to be agreed by both parties. I think it's possible but absolutely not in a systemic approach. Your escrow reputation will never increase and how will you convince the other party to chose your own escrow each time? If it becomes a real problem there are ways to add randomization in the escrow selection process.

Also, if you are able to see the amount of resolution that have been done by an escrow account, then if you see that the escrow have done many resolutions but have 0 point. You know that you take a 50/50 % bet instead of 0 to get your money back. It will be up to the amount of fees you're up to give with the level of risk you're up to take.

[dankkk]

Just like bitcoin it's an interesting concept and experiment for sure. As I understand it anyone can use the software to set up their own sites so new ebay-like sites and also darknet sites will surely rise up. I really would love seeing a competitor to ebay arise, especially one that is free. Why wouldnt people use it?

The only issue I see is the complicated method of setting up shop so far. Your everyday "ebay seller" won't have a clue how to do this they barely can turn on a computer....
https://blog.openbazaar.org/openbazaar-beta-1-0-tutorial/

Yeah that's a good point actually. I'll have to read a bit more into that. I'm sure like most technology it will get easier and simpler to use as time goes on.

I know somebody who has an ebay business. They would love to not have the fees. I could easily see them using this tech.

At the same time, ebay/paypal makes buyers feel safe. And ultimately buyers need a way to feel safe. If a buyer is buying drugs that they can't get elsewhere, yes an open bazaar is worth a try. But if somebody just wants to buy regular things, amazon and ebay offer much more consumer protection. Until this point is addressed very well, this kind of tech will have problems.

I am an optimist and I do believe that it will eventually be addressed.

Open Bazaar will offer notary, arbitration and reputation system using proof-of-burn. When everything will be geared up, I don't see why it will be any less secure than ebay/paypal.

It would be less secure because the arbitrator could potentially be influenced by one of the parties. Or the arbitrator could actually be one of the parties. When you are dealing with a site like eBay, you know that arbitration will follow a certain set of rules (regardless if you agree with these rules or not) so if you have the right evidence and enough evidence to show you are in the right then you would know with reasonable certainty that eBay will side with you. 

I agree. I think that users would be very vulnerable to potential fraud by shill escrows. This would be especially a problem at first because there would be no established system of trust in place to know which "escrow" users to trust. 

But any new site will have to deal with this and there are several measures you could put in place. There's always going to be scammers but the trustworthy people quickly show themselves and rise to the top.

Why would you deal with this kind of site in the first place when you can do a trade on a site when you know who is trustworthy? It would be difficult for people who will become trustworthy to know when it is appropriate to take a risk with another trader because the counter-party has an unknown level of risk.

[knight22]

Just like bitcoin it's an interesting concept and experiment for sure. As I understand it anyone can use the software to set up their own sites so new ebay-like sites and also darknet sites will surely rise up. I really would love seeing a competitor to ebay arise, especially one that is free. Why wouldnt people use it?

The only issue I see is the complicated method of setting up shop so far. Your everyday "ebay seller" won't have a clue how to do this they barely can turn on a computer....
https://blog.openbazaar.org/openbazaar-beta-1-0-tutorial/

Yeah that's a good point actually. I'll have to read a bit more into that. I'm sure like most technology it will get easier and simpler to use as time goes on.

I know somebody who has an ebay business. They would love to not have the fees. I could easily see them using this tech.

At the same time, ebay/paypal makes buyers feel safe. And ultimately buyers need a way to feel safe. If a buyer is buying drugs that they can't get elsewhere, yes an open bazaar is worth a try. But if somebody just wants to buy regular things, amazon and ebay offer much more consumer protection. Until this point is addressed very well, this kind of tech will have problems.

I am an optimist and I do believe that it will eventually be addressed.

Open Bazaar will offer notary, arbitration and reputation system using proof-of-burn. When everything will be geared up, I don't see why it will be any less secure than ebay/paypal.

It would be less secure because the arbitrator could potentially be influenced by one of the parties. Or the arbitrator could actually be one of the parties. When you are dealing with a site like eBay, you know that arbitration will follow a certain set of rules (regardless if you agree with these rules or not) so if you have the right evidence and enough evidence to show you are in the right then you would know with reasonable certainty that eBay will side with you. 

I agree. I think that users would be very vulnerable to potential fraud by shill escrows. This would be especially a problem at first because there would be no established system of trust in place to know which "escrow" users to trust. 

But any new site will have to deal with this and there are several measures you could put in place. There's always going to be scammers but the trustworthy people quickly show themselves and rise to the top.

Why would you deal with this kind of site in the first place when you can do a trade on a site when you know who is trustworthy? It would be difficult for people who will become trustworthy to know when it is appropriate to take a risk with another trader because the counter-party has an unknown level of risk.

Because of no fees and no restrictions.

[inBitweTrust]

Why would you deal with this kind of site in the first place when you can do a trade on a site when you know who is trustworthy? It would be difficult for people who will become trustworthy to know when it is appropriate to take a risk with another trader because the counter-party has an unknown level of risk.

Centralized escrow has proven to be risky, with all users getting robbed repeatedly. There will be victims in decentralized escrow systems , but one person wont be able to steal from everyone at once.

[johncarpe64]

Why would you deal with this kind of site in the first place when you can do a trade on a site when you know who is trustworthy? It would be difficult for people who will become trustworthy to know when it is appropriate to take a risk with another trader because the counter-party has an unknown level of risk.

Centralized escrow has proven to be risky, with all users getting robbed repeatedly. There will be victims in decentralized escrow systems , but one person wont be able to steal from everyone at once.

I would argue that if the central escrow service that is trusted you will at least know for sure that the escrow and your counter-party are not working together to scam you. You also know exactly who you are dealing with (to some degree) and know their rules (and what information they look for when making a decision as to who to side with). With this information you will know how to "cover all your bases" when doing a transaction with someone and know that any dispute should be resolved in your favor as long as your "cover your bases"

[evanito]

I can already tell it will have the same issues as eBay.

Seller beware.

[inBitweTrust]

I would argue that if the central escrow service that is trusted you will at least know for sure that the escrow and your counter-party are not working together to scam you. You also know exactly who you are dealing with (to some degree) and know their rules (and what information they look for when making a decision as to who to side with). With this information you will know how to "cover all your bases" when doing a transaction with someone and know that any dispute should be resolved in your favor as long as your "cover your bases"

Even if the centralized escrow can be trusted you cannot trust that your funds will be secure. Centralizing an escrow service has and will continue to be risky as it is a large target for malicious employees, outside hackers, or government thieves.

I would rather deal with a multiple party decentralized escrow where arbitration can be decided upon by multiple arbitrators.

[seriouscoin]

All of this talk and ppl still forget centralized service like ebay scams ppl left and right.


The escrow can be improved:
+ at any time, escrower cant hold fund over the reputation cost
+ seller cant use one escrower for over 50% of the sales.