3 ms·
Still, that's not the point. Everyone knows that it's possible to physically move items from one place to another even if the legal owner of the item does not c
by tshaddox 5y ago
Still, that's not the point. Everyone knows that it's possible to physically move items from one place to another even if the legal owner of the item does not consent. Sometimes this is even legal, as in the case of civil asset forfeiture.
- lxgr 5y ago> Everyone knows that it's possible to physically move items from one place to another even if the legal owner of the item does not consent. Maybe everybody knows it, but it certainly is worth reiterating. I find the notion of transaction finality as a spectrum very useful.
- tshaddox 5y agoI don't think it's worth reiterating, at least not in the context of attempting to argue that "finality does not exist in payments," because it involves using a contrived definition of "finality" that no is ever using when they consider whether finality exists in payments.