cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1993-10-19 - Re: ENOUGH ALREADY!!!(Was Re: Gibson

Header Data

From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray)
To: chrome@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Alexander Reynolds)
Message Hash: c953d7ec4ca3e5939837f476f916e1c8bf45a956dffde39e884d4630751bb03e
Message ID: <9310190159.AA24469@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Reply To: <Pine.3.05.9310181552.A1150-b100000@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1993-10-19 02:02:20 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 19:02:20 PDT

Raw message

From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray)
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 19:02:20 PDT
To: chrome@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Alexander Reynolds)
Subject: Re: ENOUGH ALREADY!!!(Was Re: Gibson
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.05.9310181552.A1150-b100000@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
Message-ID: <9310190159.AA24469@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Alexander Reynolds () writes:
> My first message ended something like this:  "how about multiple forms of
> digital cash?  This removes a centralized monopolized bank as a form of
> electronic power, i.e. the bank president could refuse digi-loans to those
> elements of society he figured would usurp his(her?) bank's power."

   Sounds good but money isn't fiction. If there's nothing of value backing
these "multiple forms of digital cash" you will still need to go to the
evil nasty bank president. Otherwise, it's just monopoly money.

   That's what the bank of the internet proposes to do (provide
digicash with backing). I doubt real banks would bother with digicash
anyway since they like having financial data on you.  The cost of
implementing such a system for the bank would be far more expensive
than the benefit received by the few customers who appreciate privacy.

   An enterprising credit card company might chance it sooner or later.

-- Ray Cromwell        |    Engineering is the implementation of science;    --
-- EE/Math Student     |       politics is the implementation of faith.      --
-- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu  |                         - Zetetic Commentaries      --

Thread