►
From YouTube: Growth call 2019-01-24 - New Trade Protocol Overview
Description
If you want to help Bisq grow, then this is the meeting to attend!
Everyone is welcome, and there's no need to RSVP or register, but if you do plan to attend, **please add a 👍 above** so we have an idea how many people will be there.
Note also that you can subscribe to the Bisq DAO Google Calendar to get notifications about this call and other Bisq events. See https://bisq.network/calendar.
You'll find more details on this call in following GitHub issue: https://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/88
A
All
right,
hello,
everyone,
my
name-
is
Steve
J
and
I
want
to
welcome
you
to
this
week's
growth.
Call
we
host
these
growth
calls
every
week
at
this
time
on
Thursdays
talk
about
how
bisque
has
been
doing,
and
we
can
do
to
help
the
bisque
Network
grow.
For
those
of
you.
If
this
is
your
first
growth
call
welcome.
A
There's
a
hangouts
link
in
the
YouTube
chat.
If
you
would
like
to
join
us
here
in
the
Hangout,
otherwise
you
can
post
your
comments
in
the
chat
in
the
YouTube
chat
and
we
will
respond
as
we
can
today.
We've
got,
we've
got
Manfred,
we've
got
Christoph
and
Naima,
and
our
host
actually
for
this
week
is
Neyman,
hello,
everybody
and
I.
Guess:
I'll
turn
it
over
to
9
min
now
to
go
over
the
the
rest
of
the
call.
Welcome
9
min,
hey.
B
B
Absolute,
but
you
don't
you,
don't
need
any
social
system,
because
there
are
no
mistakes
to
to
be
done.
However,
bisque
for
bisque
at
this
pollution
system
is
something
of
it.
We
need
not
necessary
static,
but
we
want
something,
but
we
need
because
I
think.
Ideally,
you
know
in
a
science
fiction,
implementation
of
bisque
I
don't
know
five
years
in
the
future
we
would
have
or
year
in
the
future,
don't
want
to
say
any
timeline.
We
would
have
atomic
swaps
between
cryptocurrencies.
So
when
there
will
be
no
dispute,
everything
will
happen
automatically
and
immediately.
B
Oh,
if
you
go
at
or
even
more
science
fiction
future,
where
banks
gives
you
API
for
your
account,
you
can
even
do
atomic
swap
so
it
would
fit
I,
don't
know
if
it
ever
happen,
probably
not,
but
this
is
like
ideally,
but
practically.
This
helps
you
to
find
people
to
do
over-the-counter
trades
with
in
the
internet.
There
is
a
bisque
follow
protocol
to
follow
and
the
protocol
is
built
in
a
way
that
that
both
sides
should
follow
it.
B
The
bisque
software
push
them
to
follow
it
and
there
was
of
insensitive
incentives
to
follow
it,
but
still
sometimes
even
to
human
errors.
It
may
happen
that
one
of
the
sides
don't
follow
the
protocol
and
the
dispute
resolution
comes
to
one
avoid
those
misunderstandings.
So
our
waiver
people
who
have
a
dispute
not
even
intentionally,
could
find
a
solution
and
solve
the
dispute
and
be
such
that
if
a
dispute
happens
intentionally
so
there
is
some
kind
of
a
checker
or
schema.
The
dispute
resolution
will
make
sure
that
the
honest
trader
is
not
at
hand.
B
What
we
have
now
is
his
arbitration
system.
We
are
going
to
speak
about
it
in
a
second
with
the
help
of
Manfred,
and
this
is
a
simple
solution.
I
would
say
almost
naive
not
in
a
bad
way,
but
it's
very
simple,
and
it
was
good
for
all
the
time
that
it
was
made,
but
I
think
the
two
things
changed
recently,
which
makes
it,
which
means
we
can
improve
it,
not
change
but
improve
it.
B
One
of
the
things
is
that
this
got
more
popular,
that's
a
very
good
thing,
but
the
arbitrator
system
is
not
so
easy
to
scale.
The
other
thing
is
that
we
are
going
to
have
the
Dow,
so
we
have
now
another
tool
which
gives
that
new
option
to
improve
this
beautiful
solution
system
and
I
I
wasn't
with
bisque
from
the
beginning.
So
she
I
don't
know
Manfred
was
was
the
common
system?
Was
the
original
one.
C
C
But
it
was
never
100%
clear
how
to
build
it
exactly
they
were
always
they
were
never
the
perfect
solution
out
there
and
we
never
had
the
DEF
resources
to
really
implement
those
follow-up
concept.
So
basically,
the
arbitration
system
is
the
same
light
from
being
wrong,
but
they
won
wetland
when
we
launched
to
enough
here
ago,
and
luckily
now
with
the
doubt,
we
have
the
possibility
to
really
change
it
in
a
way
that
we
become
fully
decentralized
on
that
there
as
well
and
remove
this
trusted
or
element.
B
There
is
also
a
Parham
of
finding
arbitrators,
keeping
them
anonymous.
I,
don't
know
who
are
the
current
arbitrators
to
be
honest
and
I'm
very
happy,
not
to
know
em
and
the
arbitrator
is
right
now
a
job
which
for
someone
to
do
it
with
he
needs
to
put
a
high
bond,
because
the
risk
of
being
a
bad
arbitrator
is
a
bit
too
big
and
the
idea
of
the
new
system
which
we
are
going
to
speak
about
in
a
second
is
to
make
it
to
add
another
poll.
B
It's
called
a
mediator
which
is
a
bit
less
powerful
than
the
arbitrator,
so
you
can
have
more
people
doing
that
you
can
have
people.
Do
it
in
different
languages,
which
is
something
but
right
now
we
hardly
have
and
add
another,
and
then
let
the
Dow
come
in
to
risk
the
cases
where
the
mediators
cannot
solve.
We
are
still
leaving
the
arbitrator
so
for
people
who
who,
like
the
system
vacant
it
means
a
personal
choice.
C
Yes,
that's
a
old
feature
requests
what
users
asked
from
the
very
beginning
and
for
various
reasons,
one
reason
is
just
like
of
resources.
We
never
implemented
it
and
enter
as
when
I
have
been
arbitrator.
I
know
that
most
of
the
cases
can
be
resolved
by
their
users
themselves,
because
I
mean
that
this
view
the
world
dispute
resolution
or
dispute
is
already
wrong.
It's
actually
customer
care,
I
mean
99%,
are
just
problems
either
with
bank
transfers
or
with
outgoing
transfers
or
box,
and
the
software
usability
problems.
C
People
are
pacing
in
Iran,
receiving
address
of
the
Alcoa
or
something
like
this
and
basically
merely
knows
camera
temps.
Maybe
we
had
you
can
count
it
on
one
hand.
Maybe
the
cases
were
maybe
they
try
to
do
a
scam
attempt.
It
was
never
really
clear
but
or
yeah.
It's
usually
not
really
at
this
good.
It's
just.
They
need
more
help,
the
software
alone
or
it's
some
out.
C
It
gets
stuck
in
a
tree
protocol
and
the
first
step
would
be
that
they
are
getting
in
touch
with
each
other
and
then
can
ask
where
what's
going
on
my
waiting
for
your
money
now
I've
send
it.
But
maybe
the
message
was
lost
and
you
never
receive
the
message
and
everything
is
results
that
they
can
quickly
gone
and
completed.
That
helps
to
speed
up
the
process,
because
the
arbitrator
is
not
all
the
online
usually
once
a
day
or
so,
and
it
was
time
it
was
event.
C
You
are
waiting
in
20
hours
to
get
a
response
from
the
arbitrator
and
then
did
he
need
to
contact
the
other
trailer.
So
you
lose
much
more
time
with
the
arbitration
system
can
be
much
faster
when
the
traders
are
contacted
or
each
other
directly
and
are,
and
and
also
for
privacy.
There's
no
third
party
who
can
become
aware
of
the
trade.
It's
really
just
the
traders
know
about
the
trade,
nobody
else
and
I.
C
Think
80%
of
the
cases
can
be
resolved
by
the
traders
without
their
trust,
with
benefits
without
any
problems,
and
there
was
always
a
little
bit
of
concern
that
people
can
have
used
this
for
sending
malware
links
or
whatever
we're
trying
to
convince
the
other
user
to
make
a
trade
out
of
this
content.
Scam,
the
useless
or
such
stuff
happen
on
local,
pitchman
and
other
platforms,
but
because
all
the
communication
is
inside
of
is
the
same
system
like
we
use
for
arbitration
system.
C
So
every
message
is
signed
so
when
they
are
a
user,
try
to
do
something
scamming
in
this
communication,
the
air
appear
always
can
open.
Then
the
next
step
the
mediator
and
can
show
this
and
can
prove
this-
that
the
other
user
stance,
that
stuff,
which
is
yeah
which
is
not
allowed
and
and
that
can
lead
them-
that
the
other
user
is
losing
a
security
deposit.
So
it's
probably
about
the
risk
yeah.
B
So
so
the
first
step
is
something
which
we
could
have
added
before
it's
a
matter
of
the
when
Theresa
says
we
added
now,
and
basically
it
means
that
if
you
have
a
problem,
the
first
thing
you
do
is:
let's
talk
about
it,
which
is
a
very
normal
human
thing
to
do
before
you
go
to
cult.
You
try
to
reach
a
compromise
on
your
own.
B
It's
about
time
to
edit
it's
very
good,
to
read
it
and
I
think
with
lots
of
the
customer
support
issues
with
that
we
have
which
I
don't
know
how
much
for
was
a
finger.
Small
percentage
will
be
solved
by
vet,
but
then,
once
this
did
not
work
out,
we
can
go
to
the
other
solution
which
we
are
going
to
add,
which
is
the
media
dose
and
the
name
of
arbitrator.
Mediators
are
a
bit
similar.
There
are
maybe
two
big
differences
between
them.
B
One
is
that
the
mediator
has
less
power
than
the
arbitrator
the
arbitrator
right
now.
The
arbitrator
cannot
decide
the
fate
of
a
trade
on
its
own,
but
the
arbitrator
and
one
of
the
sides
can
so.
This
is
the
enforcement
power
that
the
arbitrator
gets
before
the
deal
is
made
by
the
parties
to
make
a
decision
in
case
of
a
dispute.
Immediate
does
won't
have
this
power
in
case
of
a
mediator.
We
will
speak
about
the
process.
I.
B
C
B
C
One
is
there
are
customer
here
just
help
people
to
find
a
solution
in
the
very
rare
cases
where
there's
a
row
dispute
that
yeah
they're,
not
the
green,
he's
the
judge
he
made,
he
tried
to
find
a
fair
solution
for
those
and
make
the
decision
who
should
help
the
money
basically
and
the
third
role
is
that
he's
the
executi
who
wish
to
sort
keen
to
through
multisig
as
the
power
with
one
of
the
traders
to
do
the
pea
transaction?
And
this
sir
of
the
first
two
rows,
are
still
valid
with
the
mediator,
the
mediator
mr.
C
customer
here
and
when
does
row
dispute.
He
can
basically
make
a
decision.
What
he
thinks
is
the
fair
outcome,
but
he
has
no
power
to
enforce
it.
He
has
no
key
in
the
multi-sig
and
our
he
can
only
make
this
suggestion
to
both
trade
us
and
when
both
traders
accepting
it
and
agreeing
to
this
outcome,
the
proof
the
two
traders
are
doing
than
the
pea,
but
they
don't
want
to
talk
too
much
in
advance.
Yeah.
B
They
have
some
kind
of
power
to
to
solve
a
dispute.
Well,
at
least
one
of
the
sides
is
honest,
and
we
take
away
the
power
from
the
media.
It
wasn't.
The
question
is:
what
do
we
give
instead
and
the
answer
is
bit
complicated.
I
would
give
Manfred
the
first
fo
to
explain
it
and
then
I
will
try
myself.
The
second
fo
took
that,
and
hopefully
it
will
be
enough
because
it
is
not
the
most
trivial
sumption
yeah.
C
As
a
bad
thing
is
the
first
step
when
there
is
a
mediation
process
and
the
media
to
come
to
a
result
that
their
their
buyer
should
get
the
trade
amount
and
both
should
get
back
their
security
deposit,
which
is
the
normal
resolution,
then
are
most
traders
receive,
or
this
statement
from
the
mediator
and
application
will
display
some
button.
Where
do
you
agree
to
this
payout
that
they
Arabic
at
the
trade
amount
and
post
effector
security?
Deposit,
for
instance,
can
be
any
distribution?
C
That's
the
decision
of
the
mediator,
how
they
think
it's
the
fairest
way
to
make
this
deal
transaction,
but
he
has
no
power
to
do
it.
He
only
can
make
the
suggestion
to
post
parties
and
when
both
parties
click
on
this
button.
I
agree
to
that.
Then
both
traders
are
signing
the
pea
transaction
exactly
with
this
payout
distribution
and
everything
is
fine.
C
The
way
that
the
buyer
get
the
bitcoin
amount
are,
but
here
now
everything
is
possible
her
and
but
when
those
agreeing
impose
see
ok,
I
made
a
mistake:
I
was
not
paying
in
time
or
I
should
lose
my
security
deposit
to
the
other
trader,
because
the
lost
time
and
when
both
affair
and
understand
this
everything
is
fine.
Yeah.
B
Go
to
somebody
whether
it's
a
mediator
of
an
arbitrator,
this
person
communicate
with
both
sides
and
made
some
kind
of
judgment
decision
except
and
Neal.
Then
the
question:
if
both
sides
agree
to
this
decision,
then
it's
all
goodbye,
just
a
grieve
and
make
the
pair
transaction
and
the
process
is
over.
The
question
is:
what
happens
if
they
don't
agree
all
right,
yeah.
C
C
C
And
to
me
is
the
one
who
is
deciding
this
and
when
somebody
takes
an
offering
with
he.
Okay,
that's
a
offer
with
arbitration
and
when
I'm
taking
this
at
some
point,
there
will
be
extra
fee,
but
it
says
beginning
not,
but
they
will
either.
The
trade
is
a
trade
which
has
the
option
to
go
to
arbitration
or
not
in
the
case
when
they
have
made
such
a
trade
offer
with
with
option
to
arbitration
after
the
mediator
when
they
cannot
agree
and
where
they
have
a
real
dispute.
C
C
The
arbitrator
have
a
second
look
and
that
was
actually
in
the
very
early
concepts,
always
an
idea
to
have
basically
a
second
round
like
the
Supreme
Court
for
arbitration,
and
now
it's
in
a
way
that
the
mediators,
this
first
round
and
when
the
users
still
don't
agree
to
the
outcome
of
the
mediator.
Then
the
arbitrator
will
have
a
second
look,
we
investigate
completely
independent
and
he
makes
them
decision
and
then
there
is
no
it's
like
now.
The
traders
have
to
respect.
C
C
Also,
that's
and
then
then
it's
basically
over
and
then
it's
exactly
the
same
like
now.
It's
just
additionally
before
it
goes
to
arbitration.
You
have
two
extra
steps.
First,
that
the
traders
can
communicate
directly.
They
don't
need
to
when
one
trader
says
no
I,
don't
want
this
guy
who's,
weird
or
whatever
I
don't
want
to
talk
with
him.
You
don't
need
to
communicate
any
any.
Anybody
can
open
a
request
for
mediation
at
any
time.
Are
we
and
then
it
goes
to
the
mediator
and
only
the
served
around
will
be
done.
The
arbitrator
and
ice
assume.
D
C
My
experience
as
arbitrator
that
I
said
I
think
80
percent
or
more
can
be
resolved
by
the
traders.
Maybe
twenty
percent
requires.
The
help
from
a
third
party
may
be
more
for
technical
reasons.
When
post
traders
don't
understand
the
system
well
and
have
some
problems,
those
impacts
and
then
very
very
few
cases
where
there's
a
real
dispute.
Where
is
still
don't
agree
after
their
discussions
with
the
mediator
and
I,
think
that
it
might
be
something
like
not
even
one
case
and
on
solid
assume
and
now.
C
So
when
the
maker
has
made
a
offer
with
not
using
the
arbitrator,
then
it's
Tennessee's
our
system
where,
after
the
mediation,
there
will
be
a
time
lock
to
pay
up
transaction.
We
have
not
explained
so
far
because
was
not
period
so
far,
but
in
the
trade
protocol,
when
there
take
a
text
offer
both
users
are
creating
together,
their
deposit
transaction,
where
they're
older,
the
funds
of
the
trade
amount,
plus
a
security
deposit
for
both
traders
get
logged
in
into
one
voltic
transaction
and
are
additionally
to
the
current
concept.
C
Both
traders
create
a
time
lock,
clear
transaction.
This
time,
lock
will
be
let's
say
one
month,
some
hundreds
have
decided
yet,
but
it's
a
quite
long
period
and
both
Desai
was
in
the
town.
There
will
be
a
in
the
Dow.
We
can
change,
parameters
of
the
whole
system
and
one
parameter
is
the
donation
address
and
initially
it
will
be
probably
the
distillation
address,
but
there
can
be
changed
in
downloading,
so
the
stakeholders
can
define.
Maybe
we
use
whatever
from
the
Tor
project
automation
address
to
send
the
other
money,
and
this
our
asset
is
our
time.
C
Locked
payer
connection
goes
all
the
funds
goes
to
the
summation
address.
So
for
the
traders,
it's
basically
Perron.
So
post
traders
cannot
access
this
money
anymore,
yeah
and
when,
when
this
donation
rests,
the
receive
eight
states,
basically
in
the
system
of
bisque,
so
biscuits
in
a
project
receives
this
amount
and
then
the
next
step
is
that
both
traders
can
request
for
reimbursement
from
the
towel.
One.
B
Seconds
still
stay
in
the
first
in
the
first
step,
so
the
first
step
is
because
I
like
to
think
about
it
in
a
similar
thing
to
a
lightning
Network
in
a
Latin
Network,
you
open
our
channel,
but
you
also
exchange
transactions
which
are
not
being
mined
to
Bleak
shop
to
Bitcoin.
Maybe
they
will
never
be
mined,
but
they
in
case
of
a
problem
and
the
dispute
in
the
channel.
You
can
use
voice
transactions
and
that's
the
same
thing
that
we
do
here.
We
decide,
we
decide
I
mean
not.
B
We
decide
the
Dow
is
going
to
vote
on
some
kind
of
donation
address,
which
one
possibility
is
the
two
organization,
because
we
use
tor
hidden
services,
it's
fair.
If
it
we
have
donations,
they
will
go
to
toe,
so
the
Dow
will
decide
on
a
donation
address.
Then
both
traders
will
have
a
CR
not
published
transactions,
which
is
signed
by
the
arbitrator
that
they
could
use
to
send
the
money
in
the
deal
to
the
tour
to
the
national
section,
but
because
we
don't
want
people
to
do
it
immediately,
we
want
it
to
be
the
less
result.
B
We
don't
want
you
to
do
it,
panic,
Lee,
it's
going
to
be
some
kind
of
delay.
Well,
can
you
execute
this
transaction,
so
this
delay,
maybe
will
be
a
man
of
maybe
it
would
be
two
weeks
probably
I
hope
it
will
be
a
parameter
of
the
douse
of
it.
The
community
can
decide
how
much
they
want
to
make
a
delay
before
being
able
to
donate
the
money
and
once
the
money
is
donated,
it
means
that
that
in
one
way
the
deal
is
over
because
the
money
went
to
the
donation,
transaction
tutto
organization.
B
C
It's
actually
it's
the
catholic
insurance
model,
so
you
suffered
some
loss
because
the
money
founder
from
the
trade
is
lost
for
you,
but
you
as
a
victim.
Maybe
the
other
was
a
scammer
and
was
unfair
guy
and
you
did
everything
correct.
So,
of
course
you
want
to
get
reimbursed
and
to
enable
this
or
you
make
a
reimbursement
request
in
psq.
So
when
you
lost
maybe
one
Bitcoin,
you
convert
this
with
the
current
market
rate
from
PSU
to
Bitcoin,
to
the
B's
hue
value.
C
They
take
their
decision
from
the
later
when
a
mediator
was
basically
came
to
the
conclusion
that
you
are
honest
and
the
other
was
the
scammer.
Then
it's
already
a
clear
statement.
What
the
mediator
as
a
church
basically
has
decided
the
stakeholders
don't
need
to
investigate
the
case,
because
it
would
be
too
complicated.
You
don't
want
to
lose
your
privacy
against
all
the
stakeholders.
They
just
take
this
decision
from
the
mediator
and
use
this
as
the
basis
for
the
voting.
They
don't
need
to
accept
it,
but
they
don't
have
any
reason.
B
So
then
you
get
know
to
get
reimbursement.
First,
you
need
to
donate
the
money
which
is
disputed.
That's
one
condition.
Then
you
also
need
to
get
kind
of
a
stamp
from
a
mediator,
but
it
is
his
decision,
a
mediator
which
was
selected
by
the
DA
by
the
bisque
down
to
to
decide
on
such
things,
but
he
recommends,
but
you
will
get
the
money.
So
this
is
the
second
condition
right.
C
Yeah,
the
second
condition
is
already
a
part
of
the
mediation
process,
so
you
have
to
go
to
the
mediation
process
anyway,
and
the
result
from
the
mediation
process.
It's
already
clear
that
one
should
get
basically
the
money
or-
and
even
if
it's
a
case
that
the
mediator
cannot
say.
Who
is
this
chemicals
affected?
Some
are
weird,
then
it
holds
a
statement
and
maybe
nobody
gets
reimbursed
whatever,
but
it
will
be
very
rare.
Never
had
such
a
case
when
I
was
having
pizza
so
the
standard
case.
C
It's
usually
that
one
was
known
as
guarantee
I'd
have
tried
to
do
whatever
and
then
theoretically
both
can
request
this
reimbursement,
but
it
comes
with
some
fees.
So
when
they
make
this
reimbursement
request,
they
need
to
pay
a
fee
and
for
the
scammer
or
for
the
dishonest
user,
who
will
probably
stay
lucid.
He
has
no
motivation
to
make
this
reimbursement
because
the
other
stakeholders,
they
very
likely,
will
not
accept
this
request.
C
When
you
see
that
their
mediator
has
has
decided
that
he
shouldn't
get
the
money
and
then
he's
just
losing
additional
money
for
the
ps2
fee
for
doing
this
request
and
losing
time.
So
it
can
expect
that
nearly
all
cases
will
be
that
only
their
honest
person
that
we
know
basically
from
the
mediation
process.
We
make
the
reimbursement
and
then
the
stakeholders
will
accept
it
because
they
have
no
reason
to
not
accept
it
and
he
can
basically
the
lost
money
from
the
trade
as
psq.
C
B
So
youyou
demotivates
camels,
because
they
have
nothing
to
gain,
but
not
only,
but
they
have
nothing
good
to
gain,
would
also
cost
them
to
cheat
yes
and
then,
and
then
it's
also
a
way
if
people
just
want
to
burn
the
system.
Even
this
would
not
work
because
the
the
honest
trader
will
go
to
the
big
organization
and
will
ask
for
compensation
in
bisque
tokens
all.
C
Right
yeah,
exactly
I
mean
to
really
understand
it
by
as
one
thing
which
is
important
to
keep
in
mind
this
reimbursement.
This
last
step
with
burning
the
money
into
sending
to
the
distillation
address
and
then
making
the
reimbursement
should
be
very
exceptional,
and
we
we,
the
system,
has
to
avoid
that
this
happens.
Often
when
we
see
that
it
happens
20
times
a
months,
then
we
have
a
problem.
We
need
to
fix
this
problem.
C
It
should
be
very
exceptional,
maybe
maximum
once
a
month
or
even
less,
and
but
just
to
have
this
in
place,
guarantees
us
that
are
another
and
to
step
out
a
little
bit.
When
there
is
no
arbitration,
then
their
trade
protocol
is
using
a
two
of
two
more
this
week,
instead
of
a
two
or
three
more
to
see.
C
So
when
the
to
traders
cannot
come
to
a
cooperative
outcome
that
both
are
signing
a
clear
conception,
then
yeah,
the
money
is
locked
forever
and
that
could
be
used
for
a
blackmail
scenario,
because
in
the
trade
protestors,
always
in
one
situation,
one
has
more
to
lose
like
the
other.
Before
the
field
has
been
transferred,
the
seller
has
more
to
lose
because
he
is
locked
in
his
trade
amount
after
the
fields
has
been
transferred.
C
We
have
a
solution
for
this,
because
there
is
no
incentive
anymore
for
the
victim
to
agree
to
any
blackmail,
because
you
know
yeah
when
there
would
be
really
the
case
that
the
Autopia
is
blackmailing
the
other
trader
that
he's
not
cooperating
and
not
doing
the
payout
yeah,
then
the
other
trader,
our
request,
the
reimbursement,
and
he
knows
he
is
the
honest
guy.
He
will
get
the
money
back
and
the
blackmailer
will
lose
everything
and
the
reason
why
we
need
to
add
this
burning
is
because
otherwise
it
would
be
in
yeah.
C
It
would
be
a
risk
that
we
don't
know
who
are
the
traders.
They
can
be
an
enormous,
especially
with
all
coins.
So
somebody
could
trade
with
himself
with
two
entities
then
claim
yeah
I
got
him
by
the
other.
He
never
responded
and
so
on
and
then
asked
for
reimbursement
from
the
pistol.
He
kept
the
money
and
then
after
week
he
will
send
out
the
trade
amount
to
himself
and
has
received
two
times
the
money.
C
B
So
I'm
going
to
stab
a
tough
experience
in
the
last
two
months,
trying
to
explain
this
console
for
a
few
people,
so
I'm
going
to
say
now
something
and
then
say
kind
of
the
opposite.
Firstly,
what
I'm
going
to
say
this
is
not
what
we
offer
is
not
an
insurance.
It's
not
an
insurance
because
is
Manfred
said.
If
a
hundred
people
now
ask
for
compensations
and
the
bisque
now
will
probably
not
temple
improve
it,
I
mean
I
I,.
A
B
A
community
thing
but
I
think
we'll
probably
not
the
other
thing
is
that
the
reason
that
we
do
here
is
that
we
do.
The
whole
process
is
not
to
composite
people
for
the
losses,
but
it
is
to
kind
of
balance
the
risks
of
both
sides,
because
if
we
don't
do
it,
one
side
have
less
less
to
lose.
It
can
be
the
attacker
side
if
we
do
do
it
when
the
attacker
has
more
to
lose
so
it
balanced
the
risk
and
balanced
the
motivation.
C
B
C
B
C
C
C
You
look
back
how
it
was
with
credit
cards
in
the
early
days,
it's
a
terrible,
insecure
system,
and
it's
a
wonder
that
it
was
so
successful.
But
the
main
reason
why
it
became
successful
was
because
they
had
this
kind
of
insurance.
When
somebody
stole
your
credit
card
or
the
waiter
where
he
kept
all
the
number
and
your
credit
got
in
the
end,
steal
the
money.
Then
you
got
reimbursed
but
a
credit
for
that.
C
C
Don't
want
to
have
any
comparison
with
this
completely
flawed
system,
of
course,
but
I
still
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
kind
of
like
a
it
gives
they're
the
users
or
their
chance,
which
is
not
the
hundred
percent
chance,
because
you
also
don't
know
when,
when
you
get
scammed
with
a
critical,
not
your
fault
and
even
when
your
bank
account
connect,
you
have
no
guarantee
that
the
bank
or
that
the
credit
card
companies
covering
the
costs
its
yeah,
but
you
get
her
anyway.
Maybe
we
should
know
the
extent.
C
B
Was
no
no
compensation
because
the
arbitrator
could
have
helped
people
to
actually
take
action
with
the
money.
Now
there
is
a
compensation
and
compensation.
Compensation
is
the
world
which
is
you
don't
always
you
don't
use
that
often,
but
insurance
is
a
word
that
you
use
often
so
I
understand
what
you
mean.
A
crime
happened
and
then
somebody
compensate
you
give
you
some.
D
B
C
B
C
Is
the
important
focus
is
really
that
this
more
complicated
aspect
with
reimbursement
and
with
this
burning
of
the
trade
amount
and
Torretta
money
which
was
locked
in
that
this
is
only
in
place
to
avoid
the
blackmail
and
to
make
two
of
two
more
busy
possible.
Otherwise
it
will
not
be
secured.
I
think
that's
the
real
reason
and
it's
a
little
bit
like
we
are
using
in
the
arbitration
system,
TLS,
notary
or
pay
China,
where
the
arbitrator
can
request
a
page
signed
document
from
the
bank
account
statement
and
we
stepped.
C
We
have
a
temper
proof
cryptographic,
secure
proof
that
the
bank
transfer
has
happened
or
not.
Without
this
arbitrator.
Yeah
I
mean
there
is
no.
You
can
send
a
screenshot
that
you
have
sent
the
money,
but
you
can
easily
manipulate
the
screenshot
in
Photoshop,
but
with
having
the
page
signer
technology
available,
we
have
a
very
strong,
powerful
tool
on
the
outsides.
Of
course
it's,
but
really
you
just
look
up
there
locked
in
and
you
see
if
the
transaction
happened
or
not.
That's.
C
Why
I'm
the
alkaline
side
there's
basically
no
scam
opportunity
at
all
that
one
could
say:
I've
sent
it
and
he
has
not
send
it
really
but
yeah,
but
in
reality
it
turned
out
that
we
nearly
never
needed
this.
It
was
just
to
keep
out
the
scammers
that
they
don't
even
try
and
because
they
know
okay,
when
they
try
to
scam
the
arbitrator
will
ask
for
this,
and
then
they
can
approve
the
statement
and
they
are
the
liar
and
they
have
lost
everything.
So
they
don't.
C
They
have
no
motivation
to
even
try
it
and
in
reality,
when
I
was
arbitrator,
I
think
it
was
three
times
that
I
used
it
and
even
there
it
wasn't
really
meet.
It
was
just
extra
caution
and
I
think
with
this
model
for
the
reimbursement,
it
should
be
basically
the
same
that
it
just
should
enable
that
both
traders
are
cooperative
because
they
know
when
they
don't
do
it.
C
B
D
D
Just
wanted
to
point
out
I
think
that's
the
one
I
think
that
we
have
to
communicate
properly,
because
if
I
see
their
old
arbitration
system
and
the
new
mediation
system,
the
mediation
system
just
looks
like
the
slower
version
of
it.
So
it's
the
tired
I
have
to
wait
and
if
the
time
lock
is
gone
and
then
I
have
to
make
the
reimbursement
request
and
then
maybe
one
or
two
months
later,
I
will
have
no
reimbursement
but
yeah,
as
you
pointed
out,
Margaret,
that
these
cases
shouldn't
happen
at
all
or
would
be
very
rare
cases.
D
So
so
far
from
a
timing
perspective,
it
will
be
the
same,
so
it
will
probably
be
solved
with
mediators
at
the
same
time
and
it
will
be
the
familiy
incentive,
as
a
user
would
will
be
mainly
that
it's
cheaper
to
do.
The
mediation
I
use
the
mediation
to
pure
mediation
system,
then
using
the
mediation
with
arbitration
system.
Yes,.
C
B
C
You
can
read
up
all
the
details,
it's
more
or
less
for
developers
and
for
finalizing
the
concept
and
getting
all
the
details
right
are
and
beside
this
I
think
this
conversation
is
probably
the
first
high
level
our
overview
about
it.
I
mean
I,
think
I
mentioned
it
somewhere
at
some
call,
but
that
was
still
the
older
version.
Yeah.
B
Yeah
I
would
say
right
now.
This
conversation
is
a
good
beginning.
If
you
want
to
understand
it
party,
the
way
is
the
places
to
go
to
the
github
issue
which
discuss
the
improved
media
and
this
petrusha
system
or
the
new
trading
protocol
go
to
the
doc
read
well
and,
of
course,
come
to
slack
and
ask
us
because
we'll
have
to
discuss
such
things.
Yeah
around.
C
B
D
Just
one
quick
question,
as
as
Peter
and
without
me
in
the
chat,
a
couple
of
questions
and
I
want
to
add
something
so
Peters
asking
what
percentage
of
the
trade
goes
to
the
time-lock
transaction
Manfred
to
understand
it
correctly
that
the
I'm
dog
is
already
part
of
the
multi-sig
transaction.
I
mean
the
pet
or.
C
The
time
no,
you
say
it's
an
outfit
leaf
or
a
payoff
transaction
where
all
the
funds
of
older
of
the
yeah.
What
this
in
a
multi-sig,
that's
the
trade
amount
plus
the
security
deposit
of
post,
goes
to
the
donation
address.
So
all
the
money
is
lost.
Both
traders
lose
all.
That's
basically
why
we
call
about
the
burning
in
a
way
it
took
around
early.
It
goes
to
the
physical
nation
has,
for
instance,
and.
D
C
After
this
time,
the
UI
will
display
a
button.
Basically
where
I
say
when
you
want
to
do
a
reimbursement,
you
first
have
to
basically
make
this
transaction
and
publish
both
users
can
do
this
and
they
cannot
make
a
reimbursement
request
before
they
have
done
this
because
yeah
the
stakeholders
will
not
accept
this,
because
then
that
would
be
this
open
risk
that
in
reality
it
was
a
guy
traded
with
himself
and
then,
when
he
got
reimbursed,
he
is
taking
out
the
money
from
the
fan.
C
Sent
yes
receives
the
two
times
us
to
make
sure
that
we
avoid
this.
The
money
has
been
spent,
so
the
money
is
not
accessible
for
anybody
anymore
and
then
he
get
reimbursed.
So
both
users
can
do
this.
Both
have
the
power
to
go
our
yet
this
extreme
route,
that
the
money
is
lost
and
they
have
to
request
for
reimbursement
and
the
motivation
will
be
only
for
the
honest
guy
or
because
the
other
way
has
basically
no
chance
to
win.
C
So
it
would
be
pointless
when
he's
basically
the
loose
and
this
the
resolution
from
the
mediator
that
this
guy
would
make
the
reimbursement
request.
At
least
a
meter.
Honest
guy
will
make
it
anyway,
because
he
thinks
that
he
should
get
the
money
and
when
both
will
do
it,
the
loser
will
lose
just
additional
fees
and
cannot
win
anything
and
when
one
is
not
responding
which
can
happen.
C
That
may
be
the
main
or
cases
what
we
might
have,
that
some
people,
or
whatever
lost
their
crash,
the
computer
and
couldn't
continue
anymore
or
they're
just
completely
new
vision,
don't
understand
it
that
they
have
to
be
online
again
or,
and
then
it
would
go
that
route
as
well.
But
the
truth
be
wary
and
the
security
deposit
creates
some
pain
when
you're
not
careful
or
yeah
it.
It
I
think
that
should
be
a
very
rare
case
as
well.
That
one
use
is
not
responsive
at
all.
C
We
have
more
issues
that,
when
the
price
is
moving
against
the
buyer,
that
the
buyer
can
just
decide
to
never
sent
the
money
or
the
the
green,
for
instance,
or
a
Bitcoin
rhodium
and
looses
it
a
small
security
deposit
and
the
other
peer
is
basically
losing
a
good
trade
opportunity
and
to
reflect
this
better
that
secured
it
was.
It
should
be
higher
for
us
for
those
coins
which
are
very
volatile.
They
have
to
cover
this
risk
set
up
for
in
further.
C
We
we
consider
to
rise
to
raise
the
security
deposit
a
little
bit
to
to
make
it
more
costly
for
a
user
who
is
just
careless
and
don't
is
not
responding,
because
when
it's
a
trade
without
arbitration,
then
the
other
peer
would
end
up
in
there
in
this
rainbow.
It
takes
more
time
it's
a
little
bit
of
yeah.
It's
we
want
to
keep
these
cases
as
real
as
possible,
and
the
highest
security
deposit
will
add
more
incentives
for
those
traders.
We
are
not
picky
Alison,
take
care
to
get
out
the
money
yeah.
D
B
Maybe
you
can
speak
to
finish
about
the
advantage
of
this
system,
because
one
adventures
would
be
said
is
that
there
is
now
two
by
two
multi
C,
which
is
more
private.
Another
advantage
is
that
it
takes
some
kind
of
risk
of
arbitration
I.
So
so,
let's
trust
in
the
arbitrator's.
Then
it
also
makes,
from
my
point
of
view,
it
makes
the
job
of
arbitrator
a
bit
easier.
So
it
will
be
easier
to
have
mediators
and
arbitrators.
C
There
is
no
really
good
solution
with
the
current
arbitration
system
to
make
this
really
a
trustless
that
we
can
give
the
right
for
being
an
arbitrator
to
a
non
trusted
person.
At
the
moment,
the
target
raters
are
trusted
cousins,
where
we
are
sure
that
they
are
acting
honest
and
are,
and
also
they
are
quite
a
lot
of
stake
in
psq.
So
they
have
fought
an
economic
incentive
to
not
help
us
the
project,
but
we
cannot
scale
up
with
this.
When
this
is
ten
or
hundred
times
bigger.
C
We
not
only
to
our
tractors,
we
need
maybe
20
or
50
arbitrators
and
that
will
not
work
and
another
problem
is
the
arbitrator
when
he
makes
the
payout.
He
can
make
a
mistake.
We
are
great
as
a
human
and
I
when
I
was
arbitrator,
I
think
I
made
three
times
the
mystic
that
I
paid
out
to
the
wrong.
You
have
to
the
wrong
side,
and
luckily
they
were
always
honest
and
paid
back
and
they
tried
them
to
contact
him
and
they
always
paid
back.
C
So
it
was
never
real
damage,
but
in
the
worst
case
and
without
pain,
it's
one
Bitcoin
when
Bitcoin
is
again
$20,000
the
arbitrator
can
make
a
loss
from
$20,000
and,
at
the
end,
the
arbitrator
need
to
page
from
his
pocket
because
he
made
a
mistake
and
it's
out
of
his
job.
But
it's
when
the
arbitrator
is
running
for
his
work
as
a
customer
care
agent,
something
like
I,
don't
know.
C
C
C
They're,
making
a
compensation
request
to
the
Tau
and
issue
themselves
when
they
get
accepted
in
the
voting.
They
issue
our
peace
cube
to
themselves
and
that's
count
like
a
payment
and
yeah
the
mediators
they
will
be
just
mediators
are
basically
classic
a
custom,
adhere
ancient
job
and
there's
not
much
risk
because
a
mediator
cannot
steal
the
money
in
the
worst
case.
What
an
immediate
also
need
to
lock
up
RBS
coupons.
C
So
when
immediate
the
good
collude
with
another
peer
and
would
behave
incorrect,
he
will
risk
that
his
bond
get
confiscated
from
the
ps/2
state
illness
and
he
the
worst
thing,
I
think.
What
immediately
can
do
that
Lisa
very,
very
carefully
and
not
professional,
and
then
the
traders
really
complained
that
he
is
working
sloppy
and
then
he
will
get
also
kicked
out,
that
it
cannot
be
mediated
anymore,
so
I
think
yeah
which
mediate
if
the
risk
is
very
low.
So
we
can
deploy
mediators
to
anywhere.
C
We
have
two
anonymous
mediate
around
the
world
because
they
cannot
create
a
lot
of
damage
and
that's
the
main
reason
why
you
want
to
get
rid
of
the
arbitration
system.
The
arbitration
system
cannot
be
really
fully
decentralized
and
it's
or
it's
it
stays
for
the
whole
system,
a
risk
when
we
have
a
central
and
as
a
centralized
entity
and
in
the
best
version.
C
When
we
see
that
nobody's
using
the
arbitration
system
anymore,
we
will
fade
it
out
at
some
point
and
we
get
removed
completely,
but
to
not
make
a
heart
content
or
force
the
users
to
the
new
system.
We
we
decided
to
add
this
transition
or
this
system
where
post
is
supported.
When
users
really
want
to
use
it,
it
adds
a
lot
of
cost
for
an
out,
because
the
arbitrator's
as
I
said,
are
expensive
and
they
they
will
not
do
the
job
for
probably
not
even
$5,000,
because
when
they
risk
they
can
lose
$20,000.
C
Why
should
they
yeah
run
I
mean
it
would
21
when
they
make
one
time
a
mistake,
they
can
lose
the
money
whatever
and
over
four
or
five
months,
so
they
will
be
expensive
for
the
whole
system
for
a
little
tau
for
the
stakeholders.
So
we
need
to
yeah
to
carry
over
these
costs
to
the
users
who
want
to
use
this
system
when
users,
for
whatever
reason,
are
not
come
from
their
mediation
system
alone
and
want
to
get
this
extra
security
or
yeah
I'm.
Not
I
could
not
even
say
it's
more
secure,
I
think.
B
With
what
what
we
do
now
with
the
Dow
is
a
bit
what
I
said
in
the
beginning,
the
guard
dog
gives
us
a
new
option
to
use
the
Dow
as
a
company.
So
if
we
go
to
the
classical
wall
to
the
standard
world,
the
arbitrator's
are
a
bit
like
we're
like
the
police,
the
code
and
even
the
executioner.
So
they
had
some
ability
to
exit
to
execute
your
decision
when
we
go
now
to
the
mediators
and
we
go
to
a
more
standard
company
model.
B
The
mediators
are
customer
support
and
if
you
are
unhappy
with
a
customer
support,
you
can
go
to
a
company
which
is
our
entity,
and
the
company
can
compensate
you,
so
we
switch
form
form
a
very
strong
cult
model.
Well,
one
person
does
too
many
things
and
hence
has
high
risk
etc
to
a
mobile
company
model.
C
C
Anybody
who
has
use
hue
is
abuse
to
stifle
and
can
participate
in
the
voting
and
it
gets
distributed
to
that
group
and
they
make
a
collective
decision
or
if
you
should
get
the
reimbursement
or
not
and
I,
think
that's
that's
a
big
improvement
to
distribute
basically
this
power
role
to
to
the
to
the
dark.
That's.
B
B
C
I
assume
one
to
two
months
after
the
Dow
launch,
or
that
we
can
roll
out
the
new
trade
protocol.
It
will
be
a
kind
like
a
hard
fork,
or
so
users
who
are
not
updating
to
the
new
version,
cannot
trade
with
users
who
have
updated
because
it's
mainly
a
technique
or
a
resource
decision.
Firstly,
we
solve
the
American
support
post
in
Tara.
It
would
be
just
a
nightmare
on
development
side
and
we'll
add
a
lot
of
work
and
risk,
and
we
want
to
fade
out
anyway
than
the
old
trade
protocol
are.
C
So
it
would
be
just
a
lot
of
effort
and
risk
for
something
which
would
be
only
used,
maybe
for
two
or
three
months
until
the
most
users
have
updated
to
the
new
version
and
to
make
this
to
make
this
decision
to
update
easier.
That
was
a
main
reason
to
avoid
that
people
are
scared
of
the
new
system
and
prefer
to
stay
with
the
old
system
and
their
trade.
Our
protocol
would
basically
split
in
two
versions
or
in
two
forks.
We
decided
to
add
to
leave
the
arbitration
system
with
zero
fees
at
the
beginning.
C
So
when
we
see
that
most
people
still
want
to
stick
with
this
system,
we
want
to
give
them
enough
chance
to
find
confidence
in
the
new
system
and
then
slowly
increase
the
fee
and
then
see
yeah
bring
them
to
the
point
that
nearly
nobody's
using
it
anymore
and
I
mean
really.
We
try
to
to
make
it
cooperative
with
our
users,
of
course,
because
we
don't
want
to
lose
our
users.
My
dear
I'd,
like
feel
that
we
are
forcing
them
in
a
direction
and
they
don't
want
to
use
it.
C
I
mean
that
yeah
we
are
depending
on
our
users,
so
we
want
to
be
careful
that
you
really
understand
it,
but
they
really
have
to
understand
how
the
creation
system
is
the
biggest
problem
in
the
current
model.
We
need
to
get
rid
of
this
at
the
end.
Otherwise
this
can
never
be
really
fully
decentralized
and
our
yeah
and
this
new
model
I
think
it's
the
solution.
What
is
ok.
B
D
There
was
just
a
question
from
reminders
regarding
cope
corporations
because
open
Bazaar
and
bisque
has
a
lot
of
things
in
common.
If
there's
any
kind
of
cooperation
between
those
those
two
projects,
I'm
a
president,
we
talks
or
communication,
but
there
are
some
parts
that
are
similar
but
yeah
yeah.
C
D
C
They're
happening
maybe
a
little
bit
more
soon
at
either
earlier
days
and
I
mean
the
concept
of
trade
protocol
is
very
similar
with
some
artistic
and
deposit
and
arbitration.
They
call
it
a
mediation
and
yeah
I.
Think
the
politics
have
have
changed
quite
a
lot
that
they
were
much
on
this
for
her
train
the
last
year
and
a
titbit
confession
many
other
coins
and
went
yeah.
There
are
company,
they
have
investors
and
so
on,
I
think
they're.
The
spirit
of
the
two
projects
are
quite
different.
C
In
my
opinion,
the
technical
basics
and
the
conceptual
basics
are
quite
similar.
Yeah,
that's
my
conclusion:
I
mean
there's
not
much
corporation
or
whatever.
Sometimes
we
talk
a
little
bit
but
a
sinker
on
the
political
side.
What
was
going
on
over
the
last
two
years,
especially
with
the
fork
or
when
Bitcoin
cash
was
working
off
and
all
these
problems
in
that
year,
the
the
other
had
you
know.
Many
projects
have
also
went
in
different
directions
and
I
think
that's
a
situation
that.