David Freeman david_freeman@rocketmail.com writes:

...

Have to pretty much try this. Having some sort of deposits may be a good move, but who holds them?

In a per-to-peer system? good question, in a centralised system? the librarian.

So who is the librarian with lots of space and time for travelling? No-one, I suspect.

[assumptions]

So basically you are using one incomplete system for prove another incomplete system? An assumption is object with no evidence of fact backing it up which is used to help prove one system. And as such they are the mother of all f*** ups.

No, assumptions are essential to any logic system. You may not like them because they can't be proved, but you can't do anything without them. Did you know that the commonly-taught version of mathematical set theory has assumptions which lead to logical inconsistencies? A good example is Russell's paradox, the set of all sets which do not contain themselves.

There was a long effort early last century to define a set theory which was free of inconsistencies. My memory is not perfect, but I don't think that it succeeded.

Therefore, I propose that any system will have flaws arising from its assumptions. The best we can hope for is minor flaws, but by making the assumptions relevant, we can get something which serves us well.