1995-10-12 - Re: Noise: Re: CJR for perl-RSA t-shirt

Header Data

From: s1018954@aix2.uottawa.ca
To: jirib@cs.monash.edu.au
Message Hash: f2ff1b80a238406faf8c370e6cd47fc48ad08455a03b7e0e5f24b6443a7403e7
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9510120439.B29690-0100000@aix2.uottawa.ca>
Reply To: <199510120509.PAA14542@sweeney.cs.monash.edu.au>
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-12 08:45:30 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 01:45:30 PDT

Raw message

From: s1018954@aix2.uottawa.ca
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 95 01:45:30 PDT
To: jirib@cs.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Noise: Re: CJR for perl-RSA t-shirt
In-Reply-To: <199510120509.PAA14542@sweeney.cs.monash.edu.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9510120439.B29690-0100000@aix2.uottawa.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Thu, 12 Oct 1995, Jiri Baum wrote:

> > You'd still need an MD5 necktie.
> Actually, you don't - you just don't get signatures without it.
> However, authentication AFAIK was never a problem to export,
> so there's no need to bother.

True, but there's still a licencing requirment in the states (might be 
different up here). So an authentication necktie (as opposed to 
cryptographic shorts and shirts) would be on the principle that one should
not need a licence to write software. 

> Hmm, just like Monopoly money, I guess.
> Nobody's been busted yet for printing that, have they.
They don't care, too easy to counterfeit. Inflation through photocopying
would make monopoly currency as worthless as the funny money it is now.

OTOH, if you threw in strong two-way anon digicash onto a networked version,
you'd basically have a gambling setup masquarading as a MUD. See how long 
that would last unscathed? It would be a nice way to introduce the masses
to the concepts though. Make the code available and you might see servers 
springing up faster than the present digicash casinos. And since any of 
the parties involved might be tempted to cheat ("upgrading" the server in 
the sysadmin's favor, ganging up ...) some authentication might be needed.
Which means even more education for Joe Gambler.

Since doing this for real money, even real digicash, is already illegal 
in many places, it would finally drive home the need for anon security
and crypto to the eager gambler (of which there are many more than eager
pgp users).

If you make it look loony enough, the authorities might find it beneath them
to do anything. Given any success you could launch some additional for-pay 
services based on the same platform.

It's only a game, right?