From: sameer <sameer@c2.org>
To: iang@cs.berkeley.edu
Message Hash: 34c169ad58f7efd34485e6bb2db6de6f5c97d3d977b9ea249ec427f93382039c
Message ID: <199511300250.SAA07657@infinity.c2.org>
Reply To: <49j0sq$a69@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-01 08:12:31 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 16:12:31 +0800
From: sameer <sameer@c2.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 16:12:31 +0800
To: iang@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: ecash lottery (Was: ecash casino)
In-Reply-To: <49j0sq$a69@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <199511300250.SAA07657@infinity.c2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>
> So; is there a problem with the implementation outlined above? If it were
> implemented, would people play it?
>
I think it would be easier if the lottery owner was just in a
safe jurisdiction. Then he wouldn't have to worry about the legality
of it, and not worry about his anonymity. Gambling-safe jurisdictions
*do* exist.
There lies a problem if *playing* a game is illegal in the US,
which I beleive it may be. If the winners can be revealed by
bank/lottery collusion, then in order to protect the winners the
lottery can't collude with the bank. This may not be a problem,
because the lottery isn't subject to US law, so there would be no way
to force the lottery to collude with the bank to reveaol the
identities of the winners.
--
sameer Voice: 510-601-9777
Community ConneXion FAX: 510-601-9734
The Internet Privacy Provider Dialin: 510-658-6376
http://www.c2.org/ (or login as "guest") sameer@c2.org
Return to December 1995
Return to “Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>”