One of the most compelling consequences of strong privacy is pseudonymity, i.e. the ability to conduct business and personal affairs without allowing others to learn your physical identity or location. This is a very strong protection against extortion, kidnapping and all other kinds of physical violence. (Its lesser cousin, anonymity, also protects again physical violence, but it has limited usefulness in business and/or personal affairs.) (For example, if a business magnate wishes to manage a vast financial empire while still allowing her children to grow up in a safe and open environment, there is probably no better solution than that she manage her vast financial empire pseudonymously, so that would-be thugs will not know _who_ to kidnap in order to extort ransom.) Perhaps Wei Dai should apply his sharp mind to analyzing the net effect on society of _that_ phenomenon. The benefit for the individual thus protected is clear, but, as the Unmentionable Topic shows, it is arguable that the net effect on society (as it were) will be less than optimal. Regards, Zooko Journeyman Disclaimers follow: I am not a cypherpunk. NOT speaking for DigiCash or any other person or organization. No PGP sig follows.