-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com> writes:
On the other hand, untransferrable credentials are undesirable from the point of view of privacy. ... It is true that at least the ultimate linkage between pseudonym and physical body is broken, but to the extent that your on-line activities _are_ your pseudonym, it is no more desirable to allow dossiers to be built up about your on-line personality than your off-line life.
But is this really true? If a seller is using the pseudonym just to defend himself against uninvited third parties such as tax collectors, it would seem that accumulation of a dossier would be useless as long as the physical seller can't be found. What would be gained by transferring the credential (the evidence of the seller's marketable skills or whatever he's selling) to a new pseudonym? I assume that the seller receives payment by some anonymous method, perhaps electronic cash. Am I missing something? John E. Kreznar | Relations among people to be by jkreznar@ininx.com | mutual consent, or not at all. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLmmPh8Dhz44ugybJAQHBBgP7BOyYR6qWoR4rM4KKbA/G6zjoGKoyaKuH Xp8VL57VPo+k8h1onolU9MoIpnBKMK45CL7atwRkgtNgSVzINgiCkl5xaeviVd15 +fv/xYdJz8evaINwxTA5AM5KCOxF90CsKlLqgyF/ZoGeMfwTYi4us1dHtJDr8Ot3 84RR3vFdYkk= =oWFz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----