From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 18:23:18 PST
To: Jonathan Rochkind <jrochkin@cs.oberlin.edu>
Subject: Re: Why emoney? Why not a web of debt?
In-Reply-To: <ab46056806021004ab8a@[132.162.201.201]>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501201850.A29683-0100000@netcom10>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



 At 6:54 PM 01/20/95, anonymous-remailer@shell.portal.com wrote:
> >  But electronic computers are good at checking out these kinds of
> >chains automatically.  Suppose there were a web of debt-trust.  Each
> >person would indicate the other people who's iou's they will accept
> >(and the amount they would be willing to take).  Thus I might take (up
> >to $10 of) Jo's, who might take Carol's who might take Terry's, etc.

On Fri, 20 Jan 1995, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> Certainly, that's what money is after all. Pretty much.  But how are you
> going to transfer these IOUs electronically in a way that is relatively
> fraud-proof? 

I believe that the point that anonymous was making is that if
everyone is their own bank and their own currency issuer,
then identity based cash is just as resistant to state power,
and perhaps more resistant, than anonymous cash.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          |  
We have the right to defend ourselves     |   http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind     |  
of animals that we are. True law          |   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the     |  
arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.  |   jamesd@netcom.com