[Wertigoyr]

I did read it but you are right my comment doesn't reflect it.

I always thought that this part of a smart contract is ridiculous as it binds the same amount of capital as the transaction is worth on both sides.

It also doesn't fix the issue if someone with much more money than you wants to f** you over.

It also does assume you would find a good solution together just because of the capital invested but you know there are plenty of people who are not able to negotiate proper.

It just doesn't solve the issue and it doesn't solve issues like if the shipment is lost on sea. Or it's getting stolen.

A independent 3th party actually helps solving those issues.

[nprateem]

Nothing is perfect but I think in the majority of cases it'll work as well as a trustable third party but without requiring one. If someone with much more money wants to screw people over at least they'll be paying a non-nominal amount. For bigger items that kind of attack would get expensive quickly.

The amount of collateral is configurable by sellers, and since buyers will soon be able to message sellers that means it's negotiable.

[Wertigoyr]

I don't think this works.

Normal companies with plenty of transactions per day don't have the motivation or money to put that much additional capital into the system.

Of course for a few transactions per month no one cares but I assume the goal is bigger than just a few transactions.