Quote from: drazvan on May 26, 2015, 08:59:15 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on May 26, 2015, 12:02:19 AM

Quote

In most (all?) other off-chain systems, the central authority can not only track your payments (you tell them when you want to pay someone) but also control your deposits and withdrawals.

Not all, but none widely deployed afaik, however openTXS systems have blind signature cash transfers that are untraceable by the server. The control aspect can be mitigated by a federation of servers facilitating blind transfers of the same/linked instruments.

A server or a federation of servers would have to be maintained ($$$) and kept online and in business for the life of the product. It would also still know when a transaction takes place (just not the exact details). With OtherCoin, we don't know when a transaction takes place and even if we go out of business, the system still functions just fine (the software on the cards enforces the rules, not an online entity). This is also the reason I'm removing the centralized balance signing feature from the application and moving towards SPV proofs - even though it would make for a better business model (we could charge people a small fee to sign their balances), it would make the system vulnerable in case we go (or are forced) out of business. OtherCoin should not (and will not) depend on any online entity other than the Bitcoin network and should be as resilient as the Bitcoin network itself.

Sounds ideal. Can't wait to test it out.

I was merely clarifying your "most(all?)" point(query?), nothing more.