[For some odd reason, I'm only seeing Sandy's posts on this subject, not those of Merriman, Barber, or Mays.]
Patrick missed my irony. Murders can't hurt any escrow's reputation. To do so, they have to admit to being murderers who were stiffed by the escrow. NOT BLOODY LIKELY. For murder escrows, a positive reputation is meaningless. They can't--nor can anyone else--risk exposure of such negative information. Escrows that admittedly engage in abetting criminal acts can have NO MEANINGFUL REPUTATIONS.
That's just not true. Currently, many organizations--some known widely, some shadowing, some essentially anonymous--count on their reputations for being efficient, cold-blooded murderers as a means to scare off competitors, increase their market value, etc. From Jamaican gangs who execute the families of their targets to the CIA's Phoenix Program operatives who mutilated their victims horribly, such "reps" are highly useful. To paraphrase Sandy, "BLOODY LIKELY." Admitting to engaging in a criminal activity is not at issue--remember, all parties are cryptographically protected and what they "admit" to doing cannot reflect upon their physical/legal identities, only their digital reputations. And those who contract for such services, via their pseudonyms, can "admit" to wanting to buy such a service. (The issue of whether a well-respected nym like "Locke" would want to publicize a failed hit on his arch-enemy "Demosthenes" is a separate issue, which I won't conflate with this one.) Gambling is illegal in most places, unless run by the state. And yet people gamble, illegally. They use bookies. Bookies who are doing illegal things, as the gamblers are. And yet if they get stiffed by a bookie, which _sometimes_ happens, they tell their friends, family, etc., and the reputation ripples spread. Taking Sandy's "For murder escrows, a positive reputation is meaningless. They can't--nor can anyone else--risk exposure of such negative information. Escrows that admittedly engage in abetting criminal acts can have NO MEANINGFUL REPUTATIONS." argument, are we to assume that this applies to illegal betting? That stiffed bettors won't speak up because there are "Escrows that admittedly engage in abetting criminal acts can have NO MEANINGFUL REPUTATIONS"? Crypto barely changes things, except to make outside interference less likely. If, for example, Black Unicorn offers to transfer 100 Ghost Marks to Pr0duct Cypher, for some C programming, and he doesn't feel he got his money's worth, he can publicize it. Maybe we believe Black Unicorn, maybe we don't. Maybe we ask to hear Pr0duct Cypher's side of the story. Maybe we suggest that SOLONg act as a third party escrow agent. And so forth. Not perfect, in some abstract sense of ultimate truth always coming out, but reputations do indeed matter. And whether the deeds contracted for are heinous or noble depends on your point of view. To William Colby and the Viet Cong, the taking of ears and other body parts by the Phoenix assassins was a fearsomely reputable thing to do, regardless of what the 4H Club in Skokie might have thought about it. If I contract with "Sandy's Salvage--You Pay, We Slay," I want to hear that they've got some satisfied customers. (Yes, flooding of reputations is an issue. Same issues as arise in DC Nets. Same kinds of solutions.) Again, I've written too much, so I'll stop for now. --Tim May .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."