1994-12-04 - Re: Brands excluded from digicash beta

Header Data

From: jamesd@netcom.com (James A. Donald)
To: alex@omaha.com (Alex Strasheim)
Message Hash: e331e06e01c5b69015dce7182a1c7fa1f2df1b14033d1822f860f38b67215874
Message ID: <199412042340.PAA23394@netcom8.netcom.com>
Reply To: <199412040223.UAA00225@omaha.omaha.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-12-04 23:56:09 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 4 Dec 94 15:56:09 PST

Raw message

From: jamesd@netcom.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 94 15:56:09 PST
To: alex@omaha.com (Alex Strasheim)
Subject: Re: Brands excluded from digicash beta
In-Reply-To: <199412040223.UAA00225@omaha.omaha.com>
Message-ID: <199412042340.PAA23394@netcom8.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Alex Strasheim writes
> Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I 
> don't know about (always a possibility), the things I've heard about the 
> beta test make me believe that a functional transaction system from that 
> company will probably be released.

It seems that some bankers are pissed at Digicash, for reasons very
similar to the reasons that some cypherpunks are pissed at Digicash.


As I said earlier, ninety percent of success is turning up.

-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our
property, because of the kind of animals that we        James A. Donald
are.  True law derives from this right, not from
the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.            jamesd@acm.org





Thread