1997-06-22 - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism

Header Data

From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 8b759b09e995af82b9f77a672b32abb3f796ba300daa2cefe3dd30ec0aa2b084
Message ID: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-22 22:27:47 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 06:27:47 +0800

Raw message

From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 06:27:47 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Hettinga's e$yllogism
Message-ID: <199706222220.AAA26096@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>  Digital Commerce *is* Financial Cryptography,
>  Financial Cryptography *is* Strong Cryptography,
>  therefore,
>  Digital Commerce *is* Strong Cryptography.
>  and, therefore,
>  No Strong Cryptography, no Digital Commerce.

Why can't escrowed ecash support digital commerce?  Strong crypto with
a government backdoor.  That's what you're offered.  Prove it can't work.

Anon

Thread

• Return to June 1997

• Return to August 1997

• Return to “nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)”
• Return to “Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>”
• Return to “Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>”
• Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”

• Return to ““William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>”

• 1997-06-22 (Mon, 23 Jun 1997 06:27:47 +0800) - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism - nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
  • 1997-06-22 (Mon, 23 Jun 1997 07:04:24 +0800) - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism - “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>
    • 1997-08-17 (Mon, 18 Aug 1997 03:41:01 +0800) - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism - Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
  • 1997-06-23 (Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:01:22 +0800) - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism - Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
  • 1997-06-24 (Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:10:02 +0800) - Re: Hettinga’s e$yllogism - Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>