The East India Company multisig doesnt protect the customer at all

I understand that it stops exit scams by vendors but Im looking at all of this EIC stuff and the hype about their multisig but I dont see how it protects me at all if a market goes down.

This timelock basically makes it so vendors have ZERO incentive to ship anything if a market goes down, just wait the 30 days for the windfall.

Am I missing something here?

:edit: to be clear Im not totally shitting on the idea but I dont feel it protects as much as people think it does and leaves some room in certain situations for bad actors to come out on top.


Comments


[3 Points] InconvenientIdeals:

Primarily that vendors who have waited long enough to accept a transaction and not ship that the market suddenly went down before he got it out, is probably not using multi-sig, probably not doing much business in general either.

The odds of that situation being a problem are negligible, basically.


[2 Points] Wanted_drugs_2day:

So if the market goes down you'd rather have your drugs and the vendor not get paid?

If it's a multisig transaction that can still be completed without the market (cause it can) and the vendor doesn't ship then that's going to destroy their reputation elsewhere.

It'd be the same as exit scamming/taking fe orders and not shipping.


[2 Points] djinn_nnijd:

This is completely wrong, the escrow provides the EXACT same protection as central escrow.


[1 Points] octomarvel:

I highlighted this a day or so ago. I just wanna say while in the event of an exit scam (which is unlikely on a multi sig market) then yes, the vendors stand to profit from the timelock. A more probable scenario is in the case of a LE site seizure. However, the only other outcome alternative to this currently is central escrow which leaves the Bitcoin in either the hands of the market owner or LE depending on scam or seizure.

It's still a step forward from escrow which is a step forward from a direct deposit.

Let's say hypothetically that the market gets taken down by LE and you have funds in a multisig timelocked escrow with your vendor. Now, yes the vendor could ship nothing n just keep the cash once the timer runs out. BUT, the vendor would have absolutely no way of knowing when a market is about to disappear and furthermore he would have to be vending that entire time the market was up. If the market does disappear for whatever reason, the timelock gives you an avenue of recourse, which is to message the vendor directly. Usually if a market disappears, everyone gets fucked with no way out. There's atleast some hope with the timelock and an honest vendor.

Let's face it. Having hopes that a vendor will honour the order paid from the timelock is still better than reading about the latest Kimble or a news article about LE auctioning off your hard earned Bitcoin.

=)


[1 Points] returnoftentacle:

Who is the biggest thieves? Admins customers or vendors?

Multisig stops the biggest thiefs.

Its so obvious that central escrow is just a part of a scam buildup. Multisig nullifies it. Good vendors want to get paid and do long term business i imagine,

In ur scenario, a market goes down (ie steals the money). Ur basically saying that ud rather market admin or law enforcement get the money? Vendor has no obligation to ship id say. But if they knew they were getting paid, u have better chance of getting ur goods and nobody stealing from anybody.

It promotes good behavior.


[1 Points] GrandWizardsLair:

Multisig protects the buyer in the same way central escrow does -- it provides a third party who can arbitrate buyer/seller disputes and resolve disagreements. Of course, this means the "protection" is only as good as the market admins. There's still no substitute for doing your homework.

As far as the 31-day timelock goes: ITGWE most vendors ship out their packs in the event of a market closing, even if they lose money on it. Just because Market A closes doesn't mean customers won't be visiting you on Markets B, C and D -- or that they'll forget how you burned them for a few dollars when Market A exit-scammed.

The most important protection is that multisig keeps funds off the market server, thereby making it a less attractive target to hackers. (The Grand Wizard is skeptical about its value in scaring off law enforcement. It's rather utopian to assume the Feds are going to stop going after darknets just because there's no multimillion-dollar payday involved).

And, as others have pointed out, multisig protects customers because it gives vendors an incentive to offer escrow. We're the ones left holding the bag when a market goes tits-up and takes their bitcoins with them. Many of us have gone FE-only because we can't afford to lose several thousand dollars several times a year.