From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 09:26:52 -0800 (PST)
To: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Subject: Re: Crypto Bounties: Another Thought that crossed my mind.
Message-ID: <v02140b04aeb4fae78e96@[10.0.2.15]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Eric Hughes gave a two-part presentation at DEFCON IV, which he has
subsequently polished up, that addresses: 1. ways to implement a Universal
Priacy System that enables simple and anonymous data hiding using the
existing Net facilites, and 2. a system of intellectual property
distribution and funding which is based more closely on models used in
Hollywood (e.g., completion bonds).

Eric, what's the status of your proposal?

-- Steve

>Here we go again:
>
>      There are is a lot of software that we would all like to see
>developed and deployed right?
>
>      There are a lot of people out there who write code, sometimes
>even freely redistributable code, but they have to eat, and get their
>net access right?
>
>     Well, I was thinking, what if a "Crypto Software Bounty Server"
>were set up, so that someone could propose a tool that they would like
>to see, along with an initial bounty. Others could contribute toward that
>bounty (anonymously if they wish) until either the tool was delivered.
>
>     The original issuer sets standards for the software (i.e. "easy to
>use interface to mixmaster remailers for Macintosh", then must define
>easy to use; Software considered delivered when in [alpha beta late-beta
>&etc.]). The first to present software meeting these qualifications gets
>the bounty, with the caviate that the software must be either gnu-copylefted,
>or some similar "free use" copyright, after all, "The Net" paid for it...
>
>     Some of the problems (and potential solutions) I can think of in this:
>
>     1) Refusing to honor the contract--Maybe when a project is proposed,
>        some other people (for a small percentage of the total) sign on
>        as judges. When they feel that it reached the stated goal, then
>        it is done. -Or- Money put up is non-refundable, and the bounty
>        stays in the "bank" until claimed.
>
>     2) If the money stays in the bank until claimed, people might not
>        put up that much (or enough) to make a specific project worthwile--
>
>        This could be solved by allowing the "bounty" to lapse in one
>        of 3 ways:
>
>        A) <x> length of time after the initial proposal (bad because
>           i) someone could already be working on it; ii) bad because
>           other people might add to the bounty, so a potential programmer
>           might not start until the "pot" has grown to a certain level.
>
>        B) <x> length of time after the last addition to the bounty,
>           bad for both i & ii above.
>
>           These can both be gotten around (and other problems) by allowing
>           programmers to "register" with the service that they are working
>           on a project (either anonymous registery, so that people will
>           still contribute to the project, or list those registered so
>           that people know [if who] someone is working on it)
>
>     3) Funding: The server (in both the machine and the organizational sense)
>        could be funded by:
>
>        A) Interest on the money accumulated.
>
>        B) A percentage of the bounty (say 10%)
>
>        C) Both A & B.
>
>Has anything like this been proposed before? I know that the FSF (IIRC) accepts
>contributions, but I am thinking of something more targeted, more "market
>driven" if you will.
>
>This could be expanded to non-crypto software as well, just think, if half
>the X Window users ponied up $5 a peice for a "good, easy to use non-motif
>word processor", how long do you think it would take for someone to start
>coding a MS Word killer?
>
>Comments?
>
>
>Petro, Christopher C.
>petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
>snow@smoke.suba.com