1995-11-09 - Re: ecash speed

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Message Hash: d2f90faf39876d88ac17461d28a989989aa5b3cb7eae364d6532602751899747
Message ID: <199511090130.UAA13562@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <199511082345.PAA02628@jobe.shell.portal.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-09 02:42:30 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:42:30 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:42:30 +0800
To: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Subject: Re: ecash speed
In-Reply-To: <199511082345.PAA02628@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <199511090130.UAA13562@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Hal writes:
> The point is that if the anonymity afforded by ecash is too costly in
> terms of time, then we may end up stuck with a non-anonymous system
> simply because that is the only one efficient enough to work.  It would
> be good to find out if that is a serious problem.

I suspect that as CPU speed exponentiates this will become less and
less of a problem. It doesn't especially worry me.

Perry

Thread

• Return to November 1995

• Return to “Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>”
• Return to ““Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>”

• Return to “Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>”

• 1995-11-09 (Thu, 9 Nov 1995 09:35:07 +0800) - ecash speed - Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
  • 1995-11-09 (Thu, 9 Nov 1995 10:42:30 +0800) - Re: ecash speed - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
    • 1995-11-10 (Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:17:22 +0800) - Re: ecash speed - Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
      • 1995-11-09 (Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:56:30 +0800) - Re: ecash speed - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
      • 1995-11-10 (Sat, 11 Nov 1995 06:16:21 +0800) - Re: ecash speed - Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>