Re: Why Digital Cash is Not Being Used
Michael V. Caprio Jr. asks:
So what is the natural currency to trade in on the Internet?
Instead of charging for information, charge for time. You lose control of the information you sell, but you never lose control of the time you sell. People with spare time could perform services in exchange for Tacky Tokens. These Tacky Token could then be exchanged for services performed by other people. What kinds of services? Whatever people don't have time to do themselves. Jim_Miller@suite.com
Jim Miller says:
Michael V. Caprio Jr. asks:
So what is the natural currency to trade in on the Internet?
Instead of charging for information, charge for time. You lose control of the information you sell, but you never lose control of the time you sell. People with spare time could perform services in exchange for Tacky Tokens.
Currency needs to be fungible -- your time and my time and the time of a brain surgeon are not the same. Furthermore, I can't verify that you are actually giving me your time. It would be a nightmare. The natural currency today is the U.S. Dollar, as transfered via digicash. Perry
C'punks, Perry wrote:
. . . The natural currency today is the U.S. Dollar, as transfered via digicash.
BINGO. Other national currencies have a place as well, but the US dollar is the de facto currency for international transactions. S a n d y
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com> Jim Miller says:
Michael V. Caprio Jr. asks:
So what is the natural currency to trade in on the Internet?
... The natural currency today is the U.S. Dollar, as transfered via digicash. Perry It seems that ciphercash schemes, aka banks, might have cash deposits to invest. The interest on these investments might help cover the transaction costs. The value of the ciphercash might ought to be able to rise and fall (slightly, perhaps dramatically occassionally) with the performance of these investments. How about a floating cipherdollar? Holders of cipherdollars would share in the proceeds of the investment, minus real transaction costs and overhead, plus transaction fees if any. How much they were worth would depend on how long they were kept, the fee structure, etc. In other words, I'm saying that it might be easier to let the value float slightly (with a current, published conversion rate into the currency of your choice) than to peg it exactly at any particular value. If it turns out that a lot of people buy the things and keep them for a long time, it would be nice for them to increase in value (compared to our friend the US $) as a hedge against inflation. Of course, I'm merely suggesting competent money management here by the bank, not that anyone (except cypherzealots, of course) would deliberately invest this way. Sort of like interest on your checking account. A similar (more radical) scheme would equate one cipherbuck == one share of stock in the cyberbank, redeemable at whatever the stock is currently selling for (approximately). I might like safeguards of some sort, if feasible, to prevent the bank officers from absconding with the loot... -- dat@ebt.com (David Taffs)
David Taffs says:
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com> The natural currency today is the U.S. Dollar, as transfered via digicash.
How about a floating cipherdollar? Holders of cipherdollars would share in the proceeds of the investment, minus real transaction costs and overhead, plus transaction fees if any.
Basically, you have now combined a mutual fund with a currency, which causes great trouble for anyone who would like to use the one without the other. Its true that transaction costs are often paid for implicitly by banks lowering the interest that they pay you. However, thats a different question. I'd like to emphasize that Digicash is a TRANSACTION MECHANISM. Digital cash is NOT a currency. There is no need to invent a new kind of money -- there are already too many for the world's good as it is. Digicash can admittedly be used to transfer shares in cattle farms as easily as Dollars, but far more groceries take Dollars. Perry
participants (4)
-
dat＠spock.ebt.com -
jim＠bilbo -
Perry E. Metzger -
Sandy Sandfort