Most of these problems are solved by the use of bonds posted by parties. igor Ray Dillinger wrote:
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here -- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise...
I've been thinking pretty much the same thing lately. When you do business with someone, you want to know his/her True Name, so that if they 'defect' (ie, take your money on a long trip to the bahamas without delivering the goods, or take your goods on a long trip to the bahamas without giving you the promised money) you can drag their asses into court and get what they promised you.
Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym. And the hellish thing about Nyms is, they don't cost anything. If the guy (or gal) steals from you using a Nym, you can spread the word about that nym and trash its reputation. But they don't have to care, because by this time they'll be using another nym. With Nyms, somebody who has ripped off a hundred people for a million dollars each is indistinguishable from someone who's just new to the system. While Nyms have zero cost, they will never simultaneously be in use and have negative reputation.
It is also very hard to get a positive reputation with a nym; (switching to didactic mode).
Either you are doing a legal business or an illegal business. If you are doing a Legal business: A customer can go to either a nym or a true name. If a customer goes to a nym, there is no legal recourse, but if a customer goes to a true name, there is legal recourse. Therefore it is clearly better for the customer to go to a true name.
If you are doing an illegal business: You either do, or do not, create a "reference" as a result of the transaction.
If no reference is created, no reputation can be gained. QED.
If a reference is created, then it either does, or does not, identify the principals and the deal consummated.
If the reference identifies the principals and the deal then it can also be used as conclusive proof in court against them if the owner of either nym is ever discovered. And this is the best kind of "digital reputation" I can find in this system. It will be significant to someone else who has dealt with one of the principals as an introduction to the other, but cannot really be useful beyond that.
If the reference does not identify the principals and the deal consummated, then either it does not identify the principals or it does not identify the deal consummated.
If the reference does not identify the principals in the deal, then it can be duplicated at will by anyone who creates a few Nyms and puts them through the paces of a few pretended deals, and is therefore meaningless.
If the reference does not identify the deal consummated, then it becomes impossible to make judgements based upon it. -- a cocaine dealer with a million-dollar shipment is hardly going to accept a "reference" which might be based on the purchase or sale of a pocketknife. Such references are also meaningless.
Bear
- Igor.