SN-2180 已核对来源，附原文与上下文。
其他参与者原话jgarzik原帖 ↗去问问真实世界的商户，看他们愿不愿意告诉客户：你的钱有可能永远消失，任何一方都无法追回。
Ask some real-world business owners if they want to tell their customers about the chance of the money being lost forever, unrecoverable by either party.
你这么说，听起来像是钱会莫名其妙地丢掉、即便双方想合作也拿不回来。
That makes it sound like it might somehow get lost and the parties can't get it even if they want to cooperate.
你预先付款买东西时，钱同样拿不回来。消费者对此看起来习以为常。不会比那更糟。
When you pay for something up front, you can't get it back either. Consumers seem comfortable with that. It's no worse than that.
任何一方永远都有把钱释放给对方的选项。
Either party always has the option to release it to the other.
其他参与者原话nelisky原帖 ↗但烧钱方案虽然极好地防止了经济上可行的欺诈，却对报复无能为力，而且一旦一方不诚实，实际上让所有人都受损。我绝不会背书它。
But the money burning solution, while great at preventing economically viable fraud, does nothing to prevent revenge and actually makes everyone loose if one side is dishonest. I would certainly not endorse that.
那你也一定反对常见的预付款制度——那种制度里吃亏的是客户。
Then you must also be against the common system of payment up front, where the customer loses.
预付款：客户吃亏，骗子拿到钱。
Payment up front: customer loses, and the thief gets the money.
简单托管：客户吃亏，但骗子也拿不到钱。
Simple escrow: customer loses, but the thief doesn't get the money either.
你们是在说预付款更好吗？因为至少骗子拿到了钱，至少有人得到了它？
Are you guys saying payment up front is better, because at least the thief gets the money, so at least someone gets it?
想象有人偷了你的东西。你拿不回来，但如果可以——如果它有一个可远程触发的自毁开关——你会用吗？让窃贼知道你所有的东西都有自毁开关、偷了也没用（虽然你自己也照样失去它），这是好事吗？如果他们还回来，你可以重新激活。
Imagine someone stole something from you. You can't get it back, but if you could, if it had a kill switch that could be remote triggered, would you do it? Would it be a good thing for thieves to know that everything you own has a kill switch and if they steal it, it'll be useless to them, although you still lose it too? If they give it back, you can re-activate it.
想象金子被偷就变成铅。窃贼还回来，它又变回金子。
Imagine if gold turned to lead when stolen. If the thief gives it back, it turns to gold again.
在我看来，问题可能还是在于以正确的方式呈现它。首先，在博弈论讨论的语境里别把「烧钱」说得那么直白。钱从来不会被真正烧掉。你永远保有随时放款的选项。
It still seems to me the problem may be one of presenting it the right way. For one thing, not being so blunt about "money burning" for the purposes of game theory discussion. The money is never truly burned. You have the option to release it at any time forever.
