Perry E. Metzger () writes:
F_GRIFFITH@ccsvax.sfasu.edu says:
In order for electronic money to be true cash, it must be able to circulate from Alice to Bob to Carl to Dave without the need to contact the issuing bank. Otherwise, it is merely an electronic check, perhaps anonymous.
No digicash system can possibly operate under this constraint. Mere numbers, unlike gold, can be duplicated. Without some sort of central verification involved the techniques cannot work. I suppose "true" digitcal cash by your definition is impossible.
Doesn't Chaum's "observer" based system allow digi-coins to work? (e.g. by carrying around copy protection which prevents you from 'cp'ing cash instead of 'mv'ing it, or prevention of double spending?) Observer's may not be cypherpunk-correct technology but they might work with legal (govt) backing. Counterfeiters who "copy" cash by breaking the tamper-proof observers would be hunted down through traditional investigatory means. The economy/banks might take a hit the way credit card companies get hit by con-artists, but overall they would remain stable. Does anyone have a reference on Chaum's observers besides the SciAm article (which I read a long time ago and have now forgotten)? -Ray -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- EE/Math Student | politics is the implementation of faith. -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | - Zetetic Commentaries --