You seem to misapprehend me. cvTokens are certainly possible to implement--however I do prefer not to spend too much time on the details of an implementation which will be inefficient. Also, your third statement is simply incorrect.
You may be correct. I didn't want to mention my conspiracy theory until I had at least shred of evidence. (Essentially I was thinking these Decentralized exchange related threads were part of an Intelligence operation to burn developer time: each proposal sounding promising, yet being flawed in a specific pre-determined way. With the lack of technical detail I may have jumped to conclusions.)
I believe this situation is why pseudo-code was invented. You don't have to explain the logical steps with a real scripting language.
I already have the money, so I create a timelocked transaction which will become spendable in 6 months, with a sequence number of zero. It sends the full amount for the contract to my close friend who we shall denote 'C'. I sign this transaction and publish it to the network. Notice that if my friend dies or is unable to complete the contract, I will be able to publish a new transaction with sequence 1 or higher spending the funds to myself instead.
Next, C creates a transaction which spends my timelocked transaction to their ex-spouse, who we shall call 'X'. C signs the transaction and gives it directly to X.
Finally, X creates a transaction spending that transaction to a bank B, signs it, and gives it to B along with the signed transaction from C. Note that X does not need C's permission or cooperation to do this.
Now, if I do nothing, in 6 months the bank will publish their transactions and collect the amount of money I paid my friend. However, if I update my original transaction, the bank's transactions will be invalid, and they will receive nothing. Depending on my choice, an unknown specific party will receive this money.
Now of course, simply by making the original timelocked transaction final, I could have guaranteed that this unknown specific party would receive my funds. However I included the usage of sequence numbers to show how something happens at a specific time because of my inaction.
I must confess, I have not yet read the code. I am not sure exactly how bitcoind would handle such conflicting transactions before maturity. (After maturity, they should be rejected). The steps you outline essentially allow Bitcoin to be reversible for a set period of time (measured in blocks, not days or months).
Oh wow.
I'm still absorbing this thread, but I have to post some encouragement. After my speaking on "Bitcoin in the Future" on a panel at the San Jose bitcoin conference, somebody came up to me and pointed me to this thread.
I wrote a whitepaper about something very similar. Have you read it? (see my signature).
It sounds like you are one of the few people in the world who see the enormous potential of using escrow and speculators to stabilize a token, which can then track the value of any currency or commodity desired.
I don't think coloured coins are a good idea. I have no problem with alternate, niche block chains. If they fill a valid niche, they will not die out. That, and failed experiments don't have to be stored forever in the Bitcoin block-chain (as would be the case with your coloured coin proposal).