1993-08-18 - Physical to digital cash,

Header Data

From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: fc22d381d02c121dfca2f785f27f48a807ccb0b07165787e97269fd3d69a822b
Message ID: <199308181657.AA16974@panix.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-18 17:00:40 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:00:40 PDT

Raw message

From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 10:00:40 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Physical to digital cash,
Message-ID: <199308181657.AA16974@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


To: cypherpunks@toad.com

N>Pretty exhausting for the typical service industry.  Most customers
N>will pick the service that's easier to sign up for, 

They used to think this about PCs in general but we now have a hard core 
of fairly sophisticated PC users that support sophisticated 
software/hardware.  Crypto will be a niche market for a while but there 
are enough "motivated buyers" out there to support a large market.  These 
buyers would include the retail pharmacutical trade, deadbeat dads, 
wagering, the 10 million tax non-filers and the other 10 million filers 
who practice tax evasion, upscale illegal aliens, the politically 
motivated, a portion of the financial services industry.

Obviously, people won't buy until they see a "must have" application.  
What will be the "Visicalc" of digital anarchy?  Offshore debit VISA cards 
linked to anonymous accounts?  If I knew of an institution offering same, 
I could "sell" thousands of such accounts tomorrow even with an unfriendly
user interface.

N>Also, the issue of which parts of these schemes are *legal*
N>is critical, but being completely overlooked.  Any lawyers
N>out there with comments on this?  

As long as the phyical part of the institution is in a tax haven 
jurisdiction, digital cash should be legal.  Most haven jurisdictions 
allow bank accounts in the names of businesses owned by the holders of 
bearer shares.  Those haven jurisdictions that are in what is now the 
European Free Trade Area (or whatever they're calling it this month) such 
as Austria, Gibraltar, The Channel Islands, and Isle of Man may lose their 
ability to offer anonymous accounts as EEC rules tighten but there are 
many other jurisdictions.  Also, not enough work has been done in the area 
of non-anonymous anonymous accounts.  If an account is in the name of an 
institution (company, etc) beneficial ownership may be just as difficult 
to determine as with a genuine anonymous account.  A haven-based cutout 
which holds accounts in ordinary jurisdictions can do many usefull 
things.  The proliferation of non-bank banks like money market funds also 
provide other opportunities.  

"No Truce with Kings"

Duncan Frissell

Teaching individuals the technology of liberty since 1969 - Frissell & 
Associates Privacy Consulting.

--- WinQwk 2.0b#0
                                                                                                                     





Thread