cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1993-08-24 - Re: No digital coins (was: Chaum on the wrong foot?)

Header Data

From: Marc Horowitz <marc@GZA.COM>
To: pmetzger@lehman.com
Message Hash: 204867831eb20a8b6215947d9f81a06892c5c3faf6269d7be8636f2b4da32910
Message ID: <9308241842.AA00526@dun-dun-noodles.aktis.com>
Reply To: <9308241414.AA01681@snark.lehman.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-24 18:45:29 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 11:45:29 PDT

Raw message

From: Marc Horowitz <marc@GZA.COM>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 93 11:45:29 PDT
To: pmetzger@lehman.com
Subject: Re: No digital coins (was: Chaum on the wrong foot?)
In-Reply-To: <9308241414.AA01681@snark.lehman.com>
Message-ID: <9308241842.AA00526@dun-dun-noodles.aktis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>> What is wrong with large organizations per se?

This is way off-topic, but....

Large organizations have too much power.  Take a look at the sorts of
things Andrew Carnegie was able to do.  Like running at a loss in
order to squash small competitors.  That's where the Sherman antitrust
legislature comes from.  Before you call me a government-lover, I have
to say that I'm not sure which I find more abhorrent: "capitalist"
companies engaging in unfair business practices, or government
regulation.  If someone wants to explain how we can get away without
both (in personal email :-) I'd love to hear it.

I think the "right thing" is somewhere in between purely individual
transactions, with some sort of distributed trust model (the world is
too big for that to be tractable, I think), and the current model of
Huge Banks essentially controlling all money flow.  Fact is,
infrastructure costs money, and big organizations can amortize
one-time costs over more customers.

		Marc

Thread