From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 09:58:00 +0800
To: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Subject: TCM: mafia as a paradigm for cyberspace
In-Reply-To: <adbff61705021004c957@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199605181943.MAA11760@netcom12.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


TCM
>In fact, nearly all of the alleged problems with anonymous systems,
>especially the issues of defections, trust, expectation of payoff, etc.,
>have parallels in other "extra-legal" situations. For example, the Mafia
>and other extra-legal or criminal operations.

ah, and therein lies the rub. why do you hold up the mafia as an
example of how cyberspace might work in the future? it's no wonder
that people are intimidated by some cpunk ideas.

do you really consider the mafia a good example of how you would 
like "cyberspatial reality" to operate? it seems to me that people
developing future infrastructure for cyberspace ought to be more
concerned about making mafia-like roles less easy, not more easy.
but obviously this is just yammering on my part, because I and
others on the list know you better than that.

this of course is not the first time  you have held up the mafia
as a glowing paradigm, and the reason I am now commenting on it. I recall
a rather stunning message some time ago in which you talked
endearingly (well, as much as it is possible for you to do so) of
mafia informants being hunted down through information warfare,
and why this was quite fitting because of the way the government
uses the same manipulation via witness relocation. (well, not quite
like that, but the logic was hard to follow)

>Do they sometimes defect (welsh)? Sure. Do they sometimes screw over the
>little guy? Sure. Do people trust them just enough to keep dealing with
>them voluntarily? Sure.

not in a civilized society. good g*d, you consider the mafia a
model of good business? are you aware of what goes on in Italy
and Columbia, and you are becoming a mafia apologist? the basic
rule of thumb if you are operating in a mafia-like organization
is "only deal with people you can manipulate or rub out without
consequence", quite the opposite in legitimate business.

> (Before anyone mentions it, there are of course
>cases where people are forced to deal with criminal gangs nonvoluntarily,
>such as with shakedowns, hijackings of trucks, etc. But a large fraction of
>the dealings with the Mafia, Jamaican gangs, Russian mob, etc., are for
>market reasons, where a market need for drugs, girls, cheap cigarettes,
>gambling, loans, etc., is being filled by players who are outside the
>normal legal marketplace.)

an interesting thesis, quite revealing. "the mafia is fulfilling a 
valid market purpose. the killings & violence are just minor secondary
issues."  I believe in contrast I would define the mafia exactly
the opposite. the violence and terror is the key part of the mafia agenda.
the activities they involve themselves in are secondary to promoting
the basic agenda of obtaining money in any way possible. how can you
portray the mafia as an honorable business? what you will find, I think,
is that the "professionalism" that was supposedly a part of the mafia
is crumbling into total anarchy. the mafia is undergoing a transformation
in which many of their sacred taboos, such as mafia wives not being
involved, not killing certain people, etc.-- are dissolving. there
is no honor among thieves.

of course I highly doubt you will respond to my points, because you
will realize your error of revealing too much of your true opinion.
best to hide in the woodwork and post a few more bland messages and
everyone will forget my blasphemous challenge in a few days beneath
the froth.

>A number of years ago the example I usually used was "Ace Escrow--You Slay,
>We Pay," to illustrate that an anonymous escrow holder (holding untraceable
>e-cash deposited by the purchaser of a murder contract) could pay off a
>murderer who presented certain evidence, all without any of the parties
>having any idea whatsover whom the other parties were.

what amazes me about people who tend to have a warped mindset is that
they think new technology, such as cyberspace, creates a new morality.
suddenly murdering, violence, drug dealing, or whatever are supposedly
thrust into some new reality in which old rules no longer apply.
you and Jim Bell are unbelievably similar, as much as either of you
would hate to admit it. its just a cloak, in my opinion, for trying
to evade culpability. the ultimate utopia for some on this list would
be a world in which they can be held accountable for absolutely nothing,
by absolutely no one. "anarchy" is as good a word as our reality can
come close to, although I believe such a reality would be far more
sinister than that adjective connotes.

> The problem is then
>one of whether the escrow company will simply pocket the money and not pay
>off.  First, it can be set up (I think) that the e-cash is uncashable by
>the escrow company...but I'm not sure this is needed. A better solution is
>to rely on the basic nature of escrow or bonding services: their reputation
>capital is much more valuable to them than anything to be gained by
>defecting and burning their clients. Except if they are about to retire
>anyway...as with the bonded courier who defects to Rio de Janeiro with a
>bag of diamonds....the trick is to spread the escrow money around to
>multiple escrow agents, and to rely on "escrow testing services" which
>periodically ping or test the services....

think about it really hard, TCM. work out those difficult problems
associated with trying to kill people and get away with it, using
new sexy advances in technology and theory. you
have a very good start after years of deep thinking. why, 
if you can come up with such creative and compelling ideas on 
DC nets and remailers, surely you can solve this problem. it is 
a problem that begs for resolution. how many people have yearned for
such a capability over the centuries!! 

maybe talk to Jim Bell some more. perhaps
eventually you will perfect the method of perpetrating the perfect
killing!! I really do admire you, because killing people without
getting caught is surely a great unrecognized art, and one of the
most unappreciated and misunderstood.
something that has only been a dream to the blighted
wretches prior to our glorious new phases of cyberspatial technology, 
which makes human morality completely obsolete.

surely once all these difficult issues can be resolved (and surely
they can, with such great minds as RSA or Chaum walking around the
planet) there will be some excellent business opportunities for
some lucrative ventures and profits. interesting investment
possibilities. surely you will keep us informed of any future
developments so we can invest wisely as you have done for so long.

>There are many issues here. I'm not advocating murder markets, just noting
>that they provide an easy to understand and fairly "pure" example. If it
>can be done with murders for hire, it can be done with nearly anything.

right, <wink wink>

oh well, thanks for the entertainment. usually you have to go
to a theater to get the "chills up the spine" effect. kinda slick
one can get it in cyberspace.  you're right, this cyberspace stuff
has a lot of possibilities.