3 ms·
Another old process (ancient?) a teacher of mine once mentioned is that of always having three witnesses to any official transaction (usually one being a Notary
by prox 6y ago
Another old process (ancient?) a teacher of mine once mentioned is that of always having three witnesses to any official transaction (usually one being a Notary to record) and two other people present.
Having three people present is a way to protect against he said/she said.
- samatman 6y agoThree people is the minimum viable democracy: the smallest number for which a majority is possible. This principle is used all over robust engineering, from Raft to best-of-three sensors.
- kaba0 6y agoAn alternative to blockchains, Corda does something similar instead of the wasteful proof of works.
- lupire 6y agoYou only need 1 witness for that. The first two are the parties. 3 is an enhancement for redundancy. Habit an odd number is a false confidence. Think about it: what happens if you have 4 witnesses? They could tie? How is that worse, as it adds more information that maybe 2 of the first 3 are lying or wrong?
- rtkwe 6y agoHaving just the notary there relies on trusting the notary to be an impartial party, with just one witness in addition to the two parties there's only one point of verification meaning only one person you have to corrupt to be able to lie about what happened. Bringing in more people increases the size of the conspiracy required to lie about the transaction.