On 9/27/98, A Cypherpunk Who Wishes Not To Have His Name Used Here wrote to me:

In article <3.0.5.32.19980926215457.00ad1510@idiom.com> Bill Stewart wrote:

...

If there's cypherpunks relevance to this, it's that cryptographic privacy and digital cash payments make it easier to publish controversial material without the threat of violence against you.

On the other hand, privacy and digital cash payments make it easier to hire and reward hit men.

You may not like it, but there's no sense in pretending it isn't so.

True enough, though in Rushdie's case, the social environment provided enough protection that the murder could be called for, the reward could be offered, and several of Rushdie's associates could be murdered without any resort to crypto. At least if you want to publish something that you _know_ will annoy people enough that they want to kill you, you can do it more safely if you've got a range of options for anonymity. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639