1994-12-04 - Re: Brands excluded from digicash beta

Header Data

From: Alex Strasheim <alex@omaha.com>
To: cp@omaha.omaha.com (alex)
Message Hash: a20cd8cfabb191026db840cc05a633523d4ae0951e0d3d1d48727a42b0fa0035
Message ID: <199412040223.UAA00225@omaha.omaha.com>
Reply To: <199412040154.TAA00186@omaha.omaha.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-04 02:23:47 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 3 Dec 94 18:23:47 PST

Raw message

From: Alex Strasheim <alex@omaha.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 94 18:23:47 PST
To: cp@omaha.omaha.com (alex)
Subject: Re: Brands excluded from digicash beta
In-Reply-To: <199412040154.TAA00186@omaha.omaha.com>
Message-ID: <199412040223.UAA00225@omaha.omaha.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> Yes, it is granted that Digicash is in beta, and not polished.  But
> beta testing usually happens after all significant functionality is
> present.  The Digicash beta isn't moving real money, and that's a
> significant functional deficit.

Couldn't we make a similar argument against digital commerce systems in 
general?  Most of the things I want to buy aren't available online, so 
what good are net based transactions?

In a sense that's true, but at the same time it seems clear that
eventually one or more systems with goods and services I want to buy (at
prices I want to pay) will emerge.  If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't
be very interested in the topic.

Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I 
don't know about (always a possibility), the things I've heard about the 
beta test make me believe that a functional transaction system from that 
company will probably be released.

> Who can say?  It hasn't been released for real.  Clearing and
> settlement in a payments system are _most_ of the problem, not sugar
> coating.  FV is leveraging Visa for settlement, but Digicash currently
> has nothing.

I can understand why you'd need Visa's permission if you're going to be
using a system that uses that credit card to process transactions.  But if
DigiCash feels their system is secure, what would stop them from just
selling digital currency on their own?  They could say that they'll sell
e-dollars for $1, and buy them for $0.95.  Assuming they keep the revenue
from currency sales in something low risk and they committ to making a
market, wouldn't that be enough to get things rolling?  Individuals or
banks all over the world could set up operations which convert e-currency
to and from $US, working inside of the buy/sell spread set up by Digicash. 

On top of that, they'd get the interest income on the funds that back all 
the digital dollars, which would be a large source of income in addition 
to what they would make from the software.

If there's someone I can go to who will give me cash for digital currency,
I'll take digital currency as a payment for any goods and services I sell. 
If someone else will give me a check for the digicash, what does my banker
have to say about it? 


==
Alex Strasheim | finger astrashe@nyx.cs.du.edu
alex@omaha.com | for my PGP 2.6.1. public key

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBLuEn4REpP7+baaPtAQGSbwP/ccN3dvugcEgFg9lG6DuFw2JzdltDd63C
5ZkMiDMkbWly3i0d+TI5OGTFPoafjDaBRieaoCzsrjsZAWQDVrscjwrvCa38GQDD
aTZa3AF9pEixhVWN0pFiDcUx7ByO92fFexA6POHnZOvTSNws9wqQ4b1vnaofWQNE
k4s0ji7x3NE=
=+8TT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Thread