On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 16:18:32 -0400, you wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
At 12:51 PM -0700 on 8/11/02, A.Austrian.Idiot single hops yet another remailer and wrote:
Namecalling. Possibly your strongest argumentation?
I would think you might be interested in going deeper, as "Blind signatures for untraceable payments" is directly applicable to both digital settlement and digital voting.
Yes. Of course. And, if you actually read it, or even just thought about it instead of spewing oppositional bullshit to everything you disagree with politically, :-),
Must have touched quite a raw nerve here. My thanks for your not "spewing oppositional bullshit". And what, pray tell, am I disagreeing with "politically"?
you'd soon realize that you can't actually control an truly anonymous voting scheme any more than you can control a truly anonymous bearer asset. Like equity, an anonymous vote is completely salable.
Read first, spew later.
In short, sir, please to fuck off, until you actually know what you're talking about.
Another of your better argumentation. It is difficult to choose between your vulgar manner or your avoidance of facts, as the better explanation of the failure of your "Internet Bearer Underwriting" ventures. Cheers!