From: Feanor Curufinwe <feanor@nym.alias.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 06:35:10 +0800
To: Zooko Journeyman <cypherpunks-unedited@toad.com
Subject: Alternative to MTB?  (was Re: DigiCash issuers)
Message-ID: <19970904222009.7332.qmail@nym.alias.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sep 4, 14:17, Zooko Journeyman wrote:
} Subject: DigiCash issuers
> 
> Feanor wrote:
> >There might be other reasons for this:  have you looked at their _fees_???
> >Holy crap!  That's the only reason I don't have an account.  They're charging
> >top dollar for every aspect of a system that has it's only overhead in
> minimal
> >amounts of CPU time.
> 
> 
> You might be a bit behind the times on this issue.  Recently 
> MTB announced new lower fees: http://www.marktwain.com/fee.html
> 
> Are these the ones you consider excessive?

No, actually, they're fine.  Except that they penalize the merchant mroe than
the customer, which I find stupid in a tech as new as this.

> Note that if you consider the new fees to be reasonable, then 
> you are now obliged to open account as per your publically 
> posted exclamation quoted above.  :-)

Hrmm... Well, It appears I lied.  Here's the _other_ reasons why might not still
get an MTB account (although I might anyways, with some creative form filling):

1.  Lack of real anonymity.  Feh.  Nuff said.
2.  Cleint software.  You should be able to do e-cash with e-mail if you want
	to.
3.  Lack of code avalability.  Although this is improving.
4.  Chaumian blind signatures. OK, the guy's smart, but I've heard over and over
	again how much of a prick he is about liscencing.  Liek a multiplication
	and subsequent division deserves a patent.  Sheesh.

I asked before, but no-one answered:

Would any of you be interested in an e-cash that didn't have any of the points
above working against it?  Although, obviously, client softare could be writtent
ot facilitate things.

As I said before, the mint does not need to store identity-related info with the
list of coins.  With an e-mail based system and the remailers, you can be _sure_
this is not taking place.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQBVAwUBNA79jxkU7YRPCnEJAQFNQgIAwNJpK/NRKjtLM6z0kEzwxpHlhTxoj/WF
XOZDZ3rXNfgs7oamptvRKa5+WXo3qzvqEQUk3BPKgaU8zhQuKW8LDw==
=87LT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----