Quote from: geraFoerra on January 13, 2014, 03:36:37 PM

Quote from: pankkake on January 13, 2014, 02:13:11 PM

Quote from: calian on January 13, 2014, 02:01:36 AM

Quote from: ReCat on January 13, 2014, 01:51:56 AM

Or it could be escrow duos. Two escrows working together, both with access to the privkeys, so that if one dies of sudden plane crash, money is not lost.

Duos? How about 2 of 3s? Have each of the parties to the transaction be one of the three key holders.

Yes, it's better; there are many variations of course.

For example, you could have still "only one guy" as what happens now, but that lone guy would give a X-of-Y backup to other trusted people (2 of 3, 4 of 5, who cares). It's not even an issue of trust, it's also the issue of buses running over people. This can be done for wallets, but it can also be done to backup other things like account passwords so really there is no excuse, any serious service should have those kind of disaster plans.

I like the 2 of 3 reputable escrows to release BTC. But the escrow service will cost 3x more Sad

You are right, that IS an issue. Still, it does not make sense to be "one deep" in a service like this. There are just too many things that can go wrong. I've seen it time and time again in the IT industry. Only one guy "has the keys" and he gets sick, hit by a bus, chased by Chinese mafia... anything can happen!

This is a personal lesson for me - don't depend on a single individual when $ is at stake.