counterparty

The Counterparty protocol acts as an escrow service, and thereby eliminates counterparty risk from the exchange of assets.

The price of doing a trade usually increases for the local counterparty to match the risk taken by the foreign counterparty.

Your goal as the attacker is to have 1+ of these transactions give you economic value prior to your counterparty recognizing the reversal.

But the if the problem is a whole $1.50, then I simply don't understand what difference the counterparty in this transaction makes.

In some cases yes, but if your counterparty is Facebook (or commercial svc) you don't have any negotiating power.

So you need to hack and twiddle a few bits here and there for a chosen counterparty as well.

The AIG securities were hedges in the first place; apparently that doesn't eliminate counterparty risk!

Counterparties vary in trustworthiness, and even a trustworthy counterparty today might not be tomorrow.

Bank money has credit risk of the bank, base money has no counterparty risk.

The doors are locked and all proceedings are done in secret with no counterparty.

I just built a centralized business around Bitcoin, so now my customers have the same counterparty risks as before...

Maybe they don't want exposure to counterparty risk such as we find in TFA with regards to DTC/Cede & Co.

Even if you leave it in place for your counterparty to find, I'd bet that diffusion would render your "message" unreadable after just a few minutes.

I was assuming that if a user had "instant recieve" turned on and someone did an "instant send", it would go straight through their coinbase counterparty accounts.

Counterparty risk is a bitch, unless you own the Treasury Department.