From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 18:42:15 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Something that just crossed my mind. Sorry.
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960530220921.1660D-100000@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



	In some of the discussion on this list there has been some concern
about the governments position on anonymous fund transfers. Well, maybe
concern is incorrect. We _know_ (or should) what it is. They are dead set
against it. 
	My thought was that business would be against it as well, which
would make it even harder to implement. Now maybe this has been dicussed
in the years before I got here, so if it has, sorry. 

	The discussion here seems to assume that business will accept, or
even welcome the ability of it's customers to remain unknown, or nymknown.
It is my position (until proven wrong--please) that larger business DON'T
want anonymity. They _want_ to be able to track purchases and use of their
product for several reasons. 

	These are still pretty rough, but:
	1) Marketing. Here in chicago, there is a grocery store that
issues a discount/check cashing card. Because this card is a Check Cashing
card you need to give financial data to get it. This data includes
address, bank account info etc. This card is presented at purchase time,
and is of course personalized and your purchases are (assumptions from
here to end) tracked, and can be used to develop targeted marketing (with
the development of print on demand systems, this becomes even easier). 
	The use of anonymity (at this point you don't _need_ to get the
card, unless you want to use a check, so cash (how I pay, my wife is
different) is still viable) would ruin this. 
	Why would they want to change?

	2) For larger purchases, this data gathering is even more
important. I am sure that GM, Ford, Toyota et. al. keep and compile
extensive demographic information on their customers for use in product
development and target marketing. 
	
	It is my belief that it is infact big business that drives the
legislation in this country, and if they want anonymous fund transfers,
they will get it. Most people would be more than willing to use anonymous
purchasing, but big business doesn't currently want it, and IMO, they
never will.
	
	Smaller business would welcome it, but many of these businesses
are the very businesses that many fundamentalist/feminist/statist types
would like to eliminate. Porn, Sex trade, and drug trade(which is already
pretty anonymous) all fall into this category. 

	The questions that this raises are:

	1) Am I full of shit. This is very possible. 

	2) What pressure can we put on the government to go against both
their own wishes and the wishes of Big Business (answer: none, or very
little)
	3) Given 2, what can be done to change the minds of Big Business?

	Not to say that the protocalls and software shouldn't be developed
and deployed. It should, to prove that it works, and to allow those
willing to use it to do so. If it proves popular and economically viable,
it could do 3, and then 2 would not be necessary. 

	Then again, given 1...


Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@crash.suba.com