It's quite a jolt, to see one's post on one list (FutureCulture) pop up on another list (Cypherpunks). Well, it pays to stay networked. :<) I understand -- and believe I stated in the post -- that all these efforts seem to be in the future conditional tense (or is it future optimistic tense?). But I'll repeat what I mentioned to Eric at the meeting: It jarred me to see someone so blithely planning to enter into the world of international finance from an essentially "outsider" frame of reference. As impressed as I was by the range and depth of Eric's understanding of the technical aspects of encryption, I have the feeling that setting up such a revolutionary scheme -- which would threaten both traditional banking enterprises and the governments that monitor and tax them -- is bound to encounter opposition much more massive and sophisticated than he indicated. To be fair, he could only talk about the high points of his plans in the context of the afternoon talk. But I kept having flashbacks to the1960s and 70s, when counterculture groups laid intricate plans to overwhelm or endrun "the system." Put bluntly, any plans to enter international finance without a substantial component aimed at lining up political and traditional financial clout seems to me to be doomed to the dustbin of visionary schemes. After the smoke clears, we are far more likely to see Chase Manhattan with a platoon of hired cryptologists than EFF or Cypherpunks wheeling and dealing on a global scale. That's my &v$>{/! worth. <--- Encrypted digital $.02