4 ms·
I do understand that the transfers were peer-to-peer. I could hand you eCash in an offline way, from my device to yours, as if I was handing you a bill, without
by mrb 15y ago
I do understand that the transfers were peer-to-peer. I could hand you eCash in an offline way, from my device to yours, as if I was handing you a bill, without going through a bank/clearing house network to authorize and validate the transfer.
But the issuance of eCash was still done by the bank. This is what makes eCash not 100% decentralized... I would compare eCash to the "pseudo p2p" Napster file sharing network which still relied on a central server (gasp!) to index the files, which allowed authorities to shut down the "p2p" network by closing down that central server.
- jacquesm 15y ago"Real" cash is also issued centrally but nobody doubts that it can be used in a 'peer to peer' fashion for payments. Anyway, I think we're well into 'no true Scotsman' territory here.
- Drbble 15y agoReal cash isn't peer to peer, is the point. Anyone can create bitcoin, without going to a bank. You can prefer a different term to p2p if you like, but parent's point was about the complete decentralization, not the word "p2p".