From: Ryan Lackey <ryan@systemics.ai>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 05:12:07 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: eternity using politics rather than economics
Message-ID: <19981205164842.B25348@arianrhod.@>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



When I was working on Eternity DDS stuff, I basically came to the same
conclusion as Adam -- without anonymous bearer cash, you can't do
a workable eternity implementation.

It's an open question whether you could issue bearer cash backed in
Eternity-units.  That was my original plan, but it seems you would still
want to have gold-units to trade for Eternity units.  The problems of
guaranteeing quality of service in exchange for Eternity units are
complicated but tractable, but having a separate scheme for auditing
performance.

Where I think "political" schemes would be particularly beneficial is 
in sharing administrative control over a virtual corporation, etc.  While
those who believe Coase would believe corporations will devolve into 
individuals or even autonomous agents, it might be a worthwhile tool
during the transition.

As far as I can tell, having a good Eternity implementation is still
blocked on getting a reasonable electronic cash system.  There are
some people in Anguilla...