4 ms·

I'm not sure what your point is. The comment I was responding to claimed that verification represented a regression in usability in relation to cash. This is no

by darawk 7y ago

I'm not sure what your point is. The comment I was responding to claimed that verification represented a regression in usability in relation to cash. This is not true, because cash also requires verification. I'm not claiming Kong is better in this regard, simply that it is equivalent.

sooheon 7y ago
Not all verification is equally costly.
- darawk 7y ago
  True, but you should be able to verify a Kong note via an app on your phone pretty easily.
arcticbull 7y ago
Cash doesn't really require verification in most cases, if it looks good its probably good, your possession of the notes is almost certainly enough. You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. Whereas Kong requires verification because literally anything could have happened to the note that you can't determine through mere visual inspection (all the things I noted). That forces you through the awkward and painful flow of verifying each Kong note via NFC.
- CryptoPunk 7y ago
  >>You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. That's not because non-obvious counterfeits are not possible. It's just that not many of them are generated. The same could apply to non-obviously sabotaged Kong: theoretically it's possible to do, but in practice uncommon. Kong would have the added benefit of not financially rewarding the sabateur the way counterfeiting rewards a counterfeiter.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    The risks for a cash bill are just counterfeiting. The risks for a Kong bill are both counterfeiting and failure of the secure element from any of a myriad ways, including thermal, mechanical stress, static, and so on. Those failure modes cannot be detected with the naked eye necessitating much more scrutiny. It's far more likely your Kong bill just break taking its value with it into the aether than you receiving a counterfeit USD bill.
    - CryptoPunk 7y ago
      Kong bills are far harder to counterfeit than cash bills. Counterfeits non-obvious to the naked eye only require producing a convincing plastic film and hologram. Compromising the secure element to extract the private key requires advanced mechano-electronic skills.
      - arcticbull 7y ago
        Yes but counterfeit bills are very rare but broken Kong bills will be very common. Counterfeiting a bill requires special technology and evading the police. Breaking a Kong bill requires putting it into a wallet with too aggressive a fold.
        CryptoPunk 7y ago
        How do you know that a broken Kong is not obvious?
- darawk 7y ago
  > Cash doesn't really require verification in most cases, if it looks good its probably good, your possession of the notes is almost certainly enough. You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. Neither would Kong in most cases. Why would you assume that counterfeiting will be anymore common with Kong than it would for cash? > Whereas Kong requires verification because literally anything could have happened to the note that you can't determine through mere visual inspection (all the things I noted). That forces you through the awkward and painful flow of verifying each Kong note via NFC. I don't see why verification via NFC would be any more difficult than using one of those counterfeit detector pens.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > Neither would Kong in most cases. Why would you assume that counterfeiting will be anymore common with Kong than it would for cash? No, I assume that the risk of a counterfeit bill is much much lower than the risk of the IC on a kong bill failing taking the value of the bill with it forever. There's so many more failure modes for a Kong bill than the plastic it's embedded in. The bills themselves, aside from being counterfeit, cannot fail. Kong bills can be counterfeit too, and also have tens of new failure modes.

by darawk 7y ago

sooheon 7y ago

Not all verification is equally costly.

darawk 7y ago
True, but you should be able to verify a Kong note via an app on your phone pretty easily.

arcticbull 7y ago

Cash doesn't really require verification in most cases, if it looks good its probably good, your possession of the notes is almost certainly enough. You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. Whereas Kong requires verification because literally anything could have happened to the note that you can't determine through mere visual inspection (all the things I noted). That forces you through the awkward and painful flow of verifying each Kong note via NFC.

CryptoPunk 7y ago
>>You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. That's not because non-obvious counterfeits are not possible. It's just that not many of them are generated. The same could apply to non-obviously sabotaged Kong: theoretically it's possible to do, but in practice uncommon. Kong would have the added benefit of not financially rewarding the sabateur the way counterfeiting rewards a counterfeiter.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  The risks for a cash bill are just counterfeiting. The risks for a Kong bill are both counterfeiting and failure of the secure element from any of a myriad ways, including thermal, mechanical stress, static, and so on. Those failure modes cannot be detected with the naked eye necessitating much more scrutiny. It's far more likely your Kong bill just break taking its value with it into the aether than you receiving a counterfeit USD bill.
  - CryptoPunk 7y ago
    Kong bills are far harder to counterfeit than cash bills. Counterfeits non-obvious to the naked eye only require producing a convincing plastic film and hologram. Compromising the secure element to extract the private key requires advanced mechano-electronic skills.
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      Yes but counterfeit bills are very rare but broken Kong bills will be very common. Counterfeiting a bill requires special technology and evading the police. Breaking a Kong bill requires putting it into a wallet with too aggressive a fold.
      - CryptoPunk 7y ago
        How do you know that a broken Kong is not obvious?
darawk 7y ago
> Cash doesn't really require verification in most cases, if it looks good its probably good, your possession of the notes is almost certainly enough. You're not really looking for anything other than an obvious counterfeit note. Neither would Kong in most cases. Why would you assume that counterfeiting will be anymore common with Kong than it would for cash? > Whereas Kong requires verification because literally anything could have happened to the note that you can't determine through mere visual inspection (all the things I noted). That forces you through the awkward and painful flow of verifying each Kong note via NFC. I don't see why verification via NFC would be any more difficult than using one of those counterfeit detector pens.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  > Neither would Kong in most cases. Why would you assume that counterfeiting will be anymore common with Kong than it would for cash? No, I assume that the risk of a counterfeit bill is much much lower than the risk of the IC on a kong bill failing taking the value of the bill with it forever. There's so many more failure modes for a Kong bill than the plastic it's embedded in. The bills themselves, aside from being counterfeit, cannot fail. Kong bills can be counterfeit too, and also have tens of new failure modes.