IMO the thing that is needed for all these things (OT, iWAT, ripple) is to decouple the ISSUER from the OWNERSHIP REGISTRY. Transfers should not require any contact with the original issuer. Until this happens these things are not going to take off IMO, because the kind of people who have interesting things to offer are unlikely to be the same set of people capable of running highly-available internet services. The right way to do it is via byzantine quorum as explained by Szabo:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://szabo.best.vwh.net/securetitle.htmlI should be able to issue certificates to people and then go offline, only to return when the certificate is redeemed back to me. I shouldn't need to sign every transfer.
FYI, this is accurate for OT.
The issuer sends a signed message to OT, issuing the currency. The issuer can then go offline while users continue transacting the currency without him.
The issuer could issue the same currency on multiple OT servers. It's like Diaspora: each user has their own data, and can switch to any Diaspora seed they wish, and while there are multiple seeds, the users only see a single, giant social web, since the connections to the various seeds are handled behind the scenes. OT is the same way. The OT wallet may redeem one instrument here, and another there, which is intended to be as seamless to the user as possible. (Still a true OT client has yet to be written, since Moneychanger is only a test client, and does not have the GUI flow that a real client will have.)
The end result of any transaction is a signed receipt in the hands of the user, which can be redeemed at the issuer in the event that the OT transaction server disappears, and re-issued onto a new server, if you wish.
Every party (the server, the issuer, and the other users) is able to prove
which instruments are valid, and
which transactions have closed, as well as his current balance, using only his
last signed receipt.The server cannot forge any of your transactions, or change your balance. (YOU must sign first.)
-----------------------
I think the only possible improvement, in terms of
decentralized registration of ownership, is to use a blockchain, such as Bitcoin or Namecoin, which I think is the best way to do this.
But in that case, you also
lose certain capabilities inherent in OT, such as
untraceable cash, and instant finality of settlement.
Therefore I prefer to use Bitcoin / Namecoin as layers, just as OT is just another layer, in a larger overall solution. In fact, Bitcoin will solve very specific problems for OT that are not, so far, solvable in any other way.
-FT