From: jim@bilbo.suite.com (Jim Miller)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 94 13:38:01 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: In Search of Genuine DigiCash
Message-ID: <9408192037.AA10062@bilbo.suite.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




A few days ago I asked:

> Can a case be made that anonymous digicash is less risky
> (to a bank) than NON-anonymous digicash? 



There were no takers.  Therefore, I'll ask different questions:

Would a Chaum-style anonymous digital cash service be more profitable to a  
bank than a NON-anonymous digital cash service?

Are the costs involved in offering and supporting anonymous digital cash  
more, or less, than the costs associated with NON-anonymous digital cash?

In other words, why might a bank chose to offer/support anonymous digital  
cash over NON-anonymous digital cash?

If a "bank-centric" case for anonymous digital case over NON-anonymous  
digital cash can't be made, then there's little chance we'll see anonymous  
digital cash any time soon.

 

Jim_Miller@suite.com