Hal writes
So for both on-line and off-line ecash there appear to me to be problems with the notion that cash has a unique advantage in providing immediate clearing of transactions.
Obviously anonymous E Cash can be duplicated with alarming ease. Physical cash is also becoming easier to duplicate. Is identity based cash so bad? The existing grey capitalist system works primarily on foriegn check accounts. If Joe writes a check in dollars on his Swiss bank account, sends it by snail mail in a sealed envelope to Peter, who places it in his BNZ account under his Hong Kong identity, they are both fairly secure. Although the transaction is fully traceable, it is unlikely to be traced without the consent of one of the participants. Suppose each E Cash certificate grows by adding identifying material in each transaction that makes it possible, with the consent of each participant in the chain, to trace it backwards. Or suppose each participant maintains a database that makes such tracing possible and proveable. Then double spending on amounts of moderate size would be very rare, so rare we would not have to worry in normal transactions. In big transactions you have similar problems with physical cash - there is always the worry that the guards may defect, or whatever. That is why big transactions are almost always identity based.. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we James A. Donald are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. jamesd@netcom.com