3 ms·
Thats completely useless. he would never escrow his BTC before getting the money. He could loose 100% while you loose nothing.
by noxer 6y ago
Thats completely useless. he would never escrow his BTC before getting the money. He could loose 100% while you loose nothing.
- RealityVoid 6y agoIt was not useless and worked very well because you had an arbiter. If I did not give the money to him, Local Bitcoins would release the escrow back. Indeed, resolving a argument could get messy. But it worked well enough.
- noxer 6y agoThen you have third party so its no longer trust less and/or decentralized. Both parties need to fully trust the third party. Also the third party need to arbitrary choose in case of a dispute as it has absolutely no way to know which party is lying. There is no way to verify a cash transaction happened. This all just a acts as a negative incentive for scammers because cheating may or may not work and you likely are banned after the first dispute.
- randomopining 6y agoYeah exactly what I've been saying, as devils advocate. How do you transact btc for something physical safely? There's no legal recourse after the fact. At least with a car-cash exchange there is.