From: Tim Ruffing <tim.ruffing@mmci•uni-saarland.de>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Inquiry: Transaction Tiering
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:18:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1490109506.16330.20.camel@mmci.uni-saarland.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOyfL0oQrHzDmHBnWo0pTdbVU7acnsLmikTh9NU_u6HnhT4VCw@mail.gmail.com>
(I'm not a lawyer...)
I'm not sure if I can make sense of your email.
On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 20:12 +0000, Martin Stolze via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> As a participant in the economy in general and of Bitcoin in
> particular, I desire an ability to decide where I transact. The
> current state of Bitcoin does not allow me to choose my place of
> business. As a consequence, I try to learn what would be the best way
> to conduct my business in good faith. [2]
Ignoring the rest, I don't think that the physical location /
jurisdiction of the miner has any legal implications for law applicable
to the relationship between sender and receiver of a payment.
This is not particular to Bitcoin. We're both in Germany (I guess).
Assume we have a contract without specific agreements and I pay you in
Icelandic kronur via PayPal (in Luxembourg) and my HTTPS requests to
PayPal went via Australia and the US. Then German law applies to our
contract, nothing in the middle can change that.
Also ignoring possible security implications, there is just no need for
a mechanism that enables users to select miners. I claim that almost
nobody cares who will mine a transaction, because it makes no technical
difference. If you don't want a specific miner to mine your
transaction, then don't use Bitcoin.
Tim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-21 15:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-20 20:12 Martin Stolze
2017-03-21 15:18 ` Tim Ruffing [this message]
2017-03-29 9:04 ` Tom Zander
2017-03-29 12:48 ` Martin Stolze
2017-03-29 13:10 ` Tom Zander
2017-03-22 17:48 Martin Stolze
2017-03-25 4:42 ` praxeology_guy
2017-03-25 17:15 ` Martin Stolze
2017-03-26 11:12 ` praxeology_guy
2017-03-26 12:11 ` greg misiorek
2017-03-27 17:18 ` Martin Stolze
[not found] ` <fFz3k0NstFYpKctCaSKDrhPnkInjW3GgQ-3FIyokzdl_SScKjXptQsn8jnW71ax_oknq9hI8gUBllYaKo_9hMiBASSJtkL6xXN_NX8tcmXw=@protonmail.com>
2017-03-27 21:11 ` Martin Stolze
2017-03-28 7:02 ` praxeology_guy
2017-03-28 19:51 ` Martin Stolze
2017-03-27 16:29 AJ West
2017-03-28 12:58 Martin Stolze
2017-03-28 14:57 ` Andrew Baine
2017-03-29 12:51 ` Martin Stolze
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1490109506.16330.20.camel@mmci.uni-saarland.de \
--to=tim.ruffing@mmci$(echo .)uni-saarland.de \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox