3 ms·
> > And you still don't fix the problem that balances which are unchecked can be diverted. > Okay, I'll admit I might be missing something here; what do you me
by nullc 13y ago
> > And you still don't fix the problem that balances which are unchecked can be diverted.
> Okay, I'll admit I might be missing something here; what do you mean by that?
Say Alice _never_ logs in anymore and the site has noticed this. The site can just go "oh Alice, her balance in now 0" and go and gamble away those coins— sure, their holdings go down, but so do their obligations. Since Alice never logs in anyone, she's not going to protest that her coins are all gone.
- vbuterin 13y agoAh okay, that makes sense. You're completely right that that's not really solvable in general. Unless, of course, we finally switch over to a public/private key based login system and each user's balance sheet is composed of a set of authorized/signed deposits, trades and withdrawals (ie. a full blockchain, but centralized and "mined" only by the exchange's server). I wonder what possibilities that kind of setup would open.
- nullc 13y agoGo read that IRC log. :)