commit 25a4daa8d432ccd43903768d28acb76d703e50fe
parent e34c2da1fcf268d27b96fe2594f76e30183e7bc1
Author: Jeff Burdges <burdges@gnunet.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 17:03:46 +0100
Slightly shorter Taxability and Entities section
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/paper/taler.tex b/doc/paper/taler.tex
@@ -422,17 +422,19 @@ entity. Finally, we assume that at the time digital coins are
withdrawn, the wallet receiving the coins is owned by the individual
who is performing the authentication to authorize the withdrawal.
Preventing the owner of the reserve from deliberately authorizing
-someone else to withdraw electronic coins would require extreme
-measures, including preventing them from communicating with anyone but
-the exchange terminal during withdrawal.
+someone else to withdraw electronic coins would require even more
+extreme measures.
+% SHORTER:
+% including preventing them from communicating with anyone but
+% the exchange terminal during withdrawal.
% FIXME: Oddly phrased:
- As such measures would be
-totally impractical for a minor loophole, we are not concerned with
-enabling the state to strongly identify the recipient of coins
-from a withdrawal operation.
+% As such measures would be
+% totally impractical for a minor loophole, we are not concerned with
+% enabling the state to strongly identify the recipient of coins
+% from a withdrawal operation.
-% FIXME: Seems to kinda duplicate the previous paragraph, albeit doing
-% a better job.
+% SHORTER: There might be a shorter way to say this and the previous
+% paragraph together, but now I see why they were kept apart.
We view ownership of a coin's private key as a ``capability'' to spend
the funds. A taxable transaction occurs when a merchant entity gains
control over the funds while at the same time a customer entity looses
