diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'articles')
| -rw-r--r-- | articles/ui/ui.tex | 31 |
1 files changed, 18 insertions, 13 deletions
diff --git a/articles/ui/ui.tex b/articles/ui/ui.tex index 3167e7465..7ed7bf9a3 100644 --- a/articles/ui/ui.tex +++ b/articles/ui/ui.tex @@ -1383,8 +1383,8 @@ especially given that the digital wallet is likely to only contain a % I changed it to ``available funds'', but I meant _all_ the money % he has. small fraction of the customer's available funds. As a result, Taler -improves usability if the customer is able to withdraw funds once to -then facilitate many micropayments, while Taler is likely less usable +improves usability if the customer withdraws funds once to +then perform many micropayments, while Taler is likely less usable if for each transaction the customer first visits the bank to withdraw funds. This is {\em deliberate}, as Taler can only achieve reasonable privacy for customers if they keep a balance in their wallet, as @@ -1400,7 +1400,7 @@ Taler in one interesting point, namely that the wallet is given details about the contract the user enters (steps 7 to 11). However, in contrast to Taler, Bitcoin wallets are expected to fetch the ``invoice'' from the merchant. In Taler, the browser -can provide the Taler wallet with the proposed contract directly. In +can provide the proposed contract directly to the wallet. In PayPal and 3DS, the user is left without a cryptographically secured receipt. @@ -1430,13 +1430,15 @@ counterfeit money. % about maintaining change and depositing the money earned % CG: No, it's not optional, ``should'' doesn't come into the equation % here. It's a mandatory business expense. -Furthermore, merchants have the cost of maintaining change and depositing -the money earned. At the extreme, there is no definitive time until a -Bitcoin payment can be said to be confirmed (step 19, Figure~\ref{fig:bitcoin}), -leaving merchants in a bit of a tricky situation. +Furthermore, with cash merchants have the cost of maintaining change +and depositing the money earned. The most extreme case for lack of +assurances upon ``completion'' is Bitcoin, where there is no time +until a payment can be said to be definitively confirmed (step 19, +Figure~\ref{fig:bitcoin}), leaving merchants in a bit of a tricky +situation. Finally, attempts to address the scalability hudles of Bitcoin using -side-chains or schemes like BOLT introduces semi-centralized +side-chains or schemes like BOLT introduce semi-centralized intermediaries, not wholey unlike Taler's use of exchanges. Compared to BOLT, we would expect a Taler exchange operating in BTC to offer stronger security to all parties and stronger anonymity to customers, @@ -1489,8 +1491,8 @@ note that sharing coins by copying the respective private keys across devices is not taxable: the exchange is not involved, no contracts are signed, and no records for taxation are created. However, the involved entities must trust each other, because after copying a private -key both parties could spend the coins, but only the first transaction -will succeed. Given this crucial limitation +key both parties could try to spend the coins, but only the first +transaction will succeed. Given this crucial limitation inherent in sharing keys, we consider it ethically acceptable that sharing is not taxable. @@ -1502,7 +1504,9 @@ desired, the {\em reserve} would still need to be tied to a particular citizen's identity for tax purposes, and thus require similar identification protocols as commonly used for establishing a bank account. As such, in terms of institutions, one would expect this -setup to be offered most easily by traditional banks. +setup to be offered most easily by traditional banks, effectively +merging the technical concepts of a (traditional) bank accounts and +Taler reserves into one service for the customer. In terms of usability, transactional transfers are just as easy as sharing when performed over NFC, but @@ -1514,7 +1518,7 @@ needs to be assured. -\section{Conclusion} +\section{Conclusions} Customers and merchants should be able to easily adapt their existing mental models and technical infrastructure to Taler. In contrast, @@ -1530,7 +1534,8 @@ and usability. % That should be intuitive. We expect that electronic wallets that automatically collect digitally signed receipts for transactions will become commonplace. -In this way, Taler gives the user full control over the usage of their +By providing a free software wallet, Taler gives the user full control +over the usage of their transaction history, as opposed to giving control to big data corporations. \begin{center} |