1994-07-23 - Re: Voice/Fax Checks

Header Data

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 966a522190ee289b19ac5026bd3a43526d62824f77e509e4d9df07646ee7ef5c
Message ID: <199407230337.UAA12523@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-23 03:35:48 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 20:35:48 PDT

Raw message

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 20:35:48 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Voice/Fax Checks
Message-ID: <199407230337.UAA12523@jobe.shell.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Eric Hughes writes:

>You can still use an account mechanism, but with an intermediary whose
>business it is to aggregate small amounts as these proposed and clear
>the total periodically.  That's now one account setup for the
>customer.

How, though, would the ftp site which wants to know whether I'm "good for"
the one cent charge to download PGP do so?  Does it have to check with an
agent on the net somewhere which will vouch for me?  Aren't the communica-
tion costs then the same as an online system?  Or does it extend me the
one cent as credit and hope that I really do have an account with that
agent (or bank)?  Then that seems like a basic off-line system.  So I don't
understand the role of agents in solving this problem.

I find it confusing to imagine a situation where large numbers of goods
are sold for very low prices.  Will people tend to cheat, since it's easy
to get away with it (all those systems offering you one cent credits), or
will they tend to be honest, since the per-use cost is so low (but perhaps
adds up over a month)?  I suspect that nobody will pay if there is a way
they can use the servers without paying, even though they are only saving
a fraction of a cent each time.  Maybe that's just my jaundiced view of
human nature.

Hal





Thread