At 11:44 AM -0400 10/15/96, scottb@aca.ca wrote:

Hi, I have been reading numerous threads on digital cash, and I have some questions I would like discussed.

Just for your own education, this issue was discussed extensively in the early days of the list, and over on the Extropians list. I myself have written extensively about this, and the Cyphernomicon has sections on this. Hal Finney, Robin Hanson, David Friedman, Nick Szabo, and several others were active in these discussions. And the extortion/contract killings market issues are well-known to folks like David Chaum. (That people are aware of, and discussing, issues does not, of course, imply that they endorse or advocate anything. In fact, several of these named people are quite concerned with the implications.) Searches of archives, depending on what is available at any given moment, may turn up articles. Try to read these articles and raise specific points. It is unreasonable to expect any of us to write brand-new essays on well-trod ground.

I am hoping that this will spark some discussion, and maybe slow down the dlv, TM spam war.

The best way to spark discussion is to compose essays, in my opinion. For the record, you should note that I am not taking part in the "spam war" you refer to. I don't respond to Vulis, and his stuff (including any good analyses, unfortunately, go into my trash folder...sometimes I glance at them to keep current on what he's ranting about, sometimes I just empty the trash without even seeing what's landed in it. (I've also received a couple of notes from people suggesting basically that I should "stop participating and "just make nice"" with Vulis. Such cluelessness about what is actually being said, and the use of Kindergarten-level phrases like "just make nice," shows that some people have no sense of reality and have no concept of who is to blame and who is not to blame. "Why can't the Jews and the Arabs just make nice?") --Tim May "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Tue, 15 Oct 1996 scottb@aca.ca wrote:

Hi, I have been reading numerous threads on digital cash, and I have some questions I would like discussed.

currently when someone does extortion (kiddnapping too), they have two choices;

1-pick up the cash personally (or via a stooge) 2-transfer the funds via bank

Both ideas are bad, in that you stand a good chance at getting caught.

I was wondering, what if you demanded payment via Ecash, through nym servers, aliases, etc. From what I understand, it is just like cash, ie: no record of transaction, but you get the added bonus of not having to meet the other party-like a fund transfer. Once you have your 1,000,000 Ecash, you could dump it on a disk, and close your internet account (unless you really really trust your privacy technology). And I also think that you would have the option to cash this into real funds at either the Mark Twain bank, or likely somewhere in the Caymen Islands (maybe through those online gambling houses).

With a very large number of ecash users, perhaps. Otherwise, you can kinda figure out which kid raided the cookie jar - he's the one with chocolate chips smeared all over his face. Also - in order to communicate back to the perpetrator, the victim needs to communicate to the first step in the chain. The operator of that chain should not be held responisble for the system being used for criminal activity IF they are unaware of such activity. However, if they are informed that the perpetrator is forcing the victim to communicate through their system, they are no longer unaware - privacy is one thing, aiding and abetting a crime is another. What's to keep the authorities from following the trail of crubs back to the perpetrator, other than the usual threats of "don't call the cops" and "you have 24 hours to respond?" A few hops through some generally uncooperative jurisdictions might do, but perhaps El Dictator of Little Bannana Republic might just decide to hold the perpetrator's "payment" hostage ... Sounds like the making of a good movie script. Can we get Tom Cruise and one of those Thinking Machines laptops?? ;) -r.w.

I am hoping that this will spark some discussion, and maybe slow down the dlv, TM spam war.

A worthy cause :)

At 11:01 PM -0400 10/15/96, Rabid Wombat wrote:

Also - in order to communicate back to the perpetrator, the victim needs to communicate to the first step in the chain. The operator of that chain

BlackNet-type pools eliminate the chain. There is no "first step in the chain," only a message pool or Usenet group which is propagated to tens of thousands of sites around the world (and even available via one's satellite dish and local cable, a la DirectPC, @Home, etc.).

and abetting a crime is another. What's to keep the authorities from following the trail of crubs back to the perpetrator, other than the usual threats of "don't call the cops" and "you have 24 hours to respond?" A few hops through some generally uncooperative jurisdictions might do, but perhaps El Dictator of Little Bannana Republic might just decide to hold the perpetrator's "payment" hostage ...

Remailers, message pools, and untraceable cash are much more robust against these sorts of attacks than you are portraying here.

Sounds like the making of a good movie script. Can we get Tom Cruise and one of those Thinking Machines laptops?? ;)

Hollywood is too naive. I was interviewed by a screenwriter who came to a Cypherpunks meeting, circa early 1994. She took copious notes and seemed very interested in these sorts of things. From the plot she was tentatively working on, I think the eventual outcome was "The Net," but it's possible her script never got made, or was used for background, or whatever. In any case, "The Net" (and "Hackers") had essentially nothing very sophisticated in it. --Tim May "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."