From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 95 19:44:23 PDT
To: hallam@w3.org
Subject: Re: An article for Wired magazine
In-Reply-To: <9508150158.AA12834@zorch.w3.org>
Message-ID: <199508150244.WAA19899@panix4.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



hallam@w3.org writes:
> The problem with Chaum's work is that it is unbalanced. He considers
> only the privacy aspect. The prevention of extortion aspect he does
> not consider.  DigiCash have never addressed the baby-napping
> protocol problem as far as I am aware.

DigiCash as defined makes it trivial to trace cash you give to someone
provided there is collusion between the payer and the bank. Doesn't
that solve the baby-napping problem?

Incidently, so far as I know, there is no physical world way to solve
the babynapping problem. Hell, you can just demand a case with five
kilos of gold in it if $50,000 in cash doesn't suit your tastes. I
defy governments to eliminate gold as well as paper currency.

> Governments have certain rights in our society that individuals do
> not. This is justified by their being democratically accountable.

Lets not get into a polititical discussion, but many of us here would
deny the legitimacy of authoritarianism simply on the basis that a
majority of the tiny minority that votes decided to vote for it.

.pm