3 ms·
I assume the point is that an individual wouldn’t just form a trust link with another individual without some confidence of their “true” identity. For me to tru
by baddox 9y ago
I assume the point is that an individual wouldn’t just form a trust link with another individual without some confidence of their “true” identity. For me to trust someone’s currency, I would either need to be very sure of their identity through some trusted third-party system (e.g. a centralized system like government ID), or be involved in an extensive social (and probably in-person) relationship that would be difficult to fake (like friendship).
For the latter, what I mean is that it’s probably prohibitively difficult to maintain two significant in-person social graphs that have no overlapping members. Sure, people can get away with it for things like romantic affairs, but the incentive there is very different than money exchange, not to mention that romantic affairs often get discovered.
- dllthomas 9y agoI don't see that overlap in the social graph implies a high enough chance of discovery. Wouldn't discovery require that members from each group are actually involved in the same financial transaction (in a way such that people are paying attention to who's involved)? It may well be possible to keep that rare enough for long enough that people try it, and are sufficiently successful to be a problem. (This is certainly not confidence that it wont work, just lack of confidence that it will, pending further reading/experimentation/analysis...)