Multi-sig is so cool tho. Maybe we need a new breed of wallets to accomodate it?
Greenwallet and some others already support it.
Topic: Multi-sig or escrow? (Read 1023 times)
Greenwallet and some others already support it.
Multi-sig is so cool tho. Maybe we need a new breed of wallets to accomodate it?
If you know some trustfull and active escrow then there shouldn't be problem.
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig? Or: why not escrow _with_ multi-sig 
It's a lot easier for noobs to use a trusted escrow than it is for them to get their heads around multi-sig wallets.
Hoping they get simplified in the future
even with escrow, if the buyer and escrow disappear then multisig fails.
True. Therefore, when choosing escrow it would be a good idea to choose someone that you trust and who you feel is reliable.
Escrow you can use for BTC transactions safety, when you are not sure about the deal and BTC sender. It is like in the banks, they use similar methode. Multi sig wallet is something different - it can always give you more transaction safety. Both are good services 
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig?
MultiSig alone can be a problem if one party disappears before the transaction is complete. There is no way for the remaining party to acquire control of the funds.
Or: why not escrow _with_ multi-sig
Escrow with multi-sid is a great idea. Unfortunately, there aren't any wallets that make multi-sig easy and convenient for novice users yet.
Ohhh. Thanks bro:)
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig?
MultiSig alone can be a problem if one party disappears before the transaction is complete. There is no way for the remaining party to acquire control of the funds.
A 2-of-3 multisig shouldn't have this problem. Even if the escrow service provider disappears, the two parties can still discuss and clear the transaction themselves.
I guess Danny was talking about MultiSig without escrow when he made the comment above.
And even with escrow, if the buyer and escrow disappear then multisig fails.
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig?
MultiSig alone can be a problem if one party disappears before the transaction is complete. There is no way for the remaining party to acquire control of the funds.
A 2-of-3 multisig shouldn't have this problem. Even if the escrow service provider disappears, the two parties can still discuss and clear the transaction themselves.
I guess Danny was talking about MultiSig without escrow when he made the comment above.
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig?
MultiSig alone can be a problem if one party disappears before the transaction is complete. There is no way for the remaining party to acquire control of the funds.
botany, yup you are right. My bad. I somehow read the his first section and his second quote together.
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig?
MultiSig alone can be a problem if one party disappears before the transaction is complete. There is no way for the remaining party to acquire control of the funds.
Or: why not escrow _with_ multi-sig
Escrow with multi-sig is a great idea. Unfortunately, there aren't any wallets that make multi-sig easy and convenient for novice users yet.
Or: why escrow when there is multi-sig? Or: why not escrow _with_ multi-sig
Jump to: