Re: IMP (was Re: ecash-info (fwd))
Oh boy. Now I'm in for it... I *really* didn't mean to put the ball through the window, mister, I was just trying to play.... Tim May said,
David Chaum's work is of course central to Cypherpunks...
[Agree to all up to this point \|/]
IMP-interest folks had an especially naive view, for the most part (based on posts I saw and things I heard from participants). I wished them well, but it seemed unlikely that a group of such hobbyists could build a real digicash system while avoiding Chaum's work!
implicit in it was a sort of top-down-plan idea that was incongruous with the do-it-first ethic of the internet. Cypherpunks write code, or Chaum does, anyway ;-).
Even with the smiley, are you implying Cypherpunks don't actually write code?
[I think the ball goes through the window about here...] I *really* didn't mean that at all. I did not *even* mean to "cast asparagus" on your collective efforts. *Really*. What I meant is that Chaum seemed to be making the implicit claim that he had gone out and done something a whole lot of people around here seem to have been hoping for for a long time: an Internet Mercantile Protocol. *Not* a Kerberos-based Billing Server, *Not* anonymous credit cards, *Not* a coffee-klatch at a BOF session somewhere, but a real way for people to do cash transactions on the internet. I think of Chaum as the 900 lb gorilla in all of this. Chaum is really (because he owns the patents, after all) the only guy who could do something here. I am _happy_ that he and his folks have kicked the snowball down the hill. In my enthusiasm, I was applauding Chaum for doing something whose time has come; I was *not* saying anything about the efforts of the people on this list. If I gave that impression I *really* apologize. Now the other stuff...
Could we talk about IMP here?
Digital cash is discussed here often. And every one of the various "digital money" schemes announced by folks has--I think--been forwared here and discussed. In my view, Cypherpunks have talked a lot more about Internet Mercantile Protocols than the IMP-interest list has talked about crypto (an absolutely core technology, of course).
Having read the roasted-over imp-archives on thumper at belcore, I agree. I was making the request in light of the fact that you folks have worked over this ground before. I was asking your indulgence more than anything else...
1.) Chaum's e-cash coupled with WWW/Mosaic is a de facto internet mercantile protocol.
Hardly. Maybe it will be in the future, but enough infrastructure pieces are lacking that it can hardly be called a "de facto internet mercantile protocol."
[snip]
(Cf. the soda archives for a "Glossary" and various articles on Chaumian things.)
[will do] This is the main point of my posting, I believe. It seems to me that more than that is being claimed by Chaum and Co. [snip]
Of course crypto and true digital cash is central....this is our whole message, nearly.
Violent agreement here...
You may be new to the list, but Magic Money/Tacky have been discussed as recently as last week. And ftp sites have been listed. Also, within the last week there were several discussions of making the schemes more "usable by the masses." (Having said this, MM is _not_ an easily usable, readily-convertible currency or even a payment xfer system for real currency...again, see the many posts on this.)
I agree. I just started learning about all this stuff in the last three months or so. But, I've been lurking here since. I have been paying attention. Honest. I've been trying to do my homework. I've pulled everything down out of Nexis/Lexis that I could find on Internet Commerce and Digital Cash, Chaum, Eric, the Cypherpunks group (not you in particular, I'm afraid ;-)). Hell, I've even read Schneier, though for the life of me I couldn't discuss 10% of the technical stuff and keep a straight face (for pretending like I knew what I was talking about, in other words).
Just a second. My flame-suit is around here somewhere... OK. Flame on.
Putting this thing on has drawn more fire than it kept off of me. I better keep it off.
I don't think of my comments as flamish, but the comments here seem to bespeak no awareness of the heavy focus Cypherpunks has had on digital cash for a long time.
Here's where I wish eudora had a "say what I mean" feature... Again my apologies...
That we have not "deployed" digital cash is related to many factors, including patents, lack of financial incentive (Chaum's folks have spent perhaps 10-20 man-years and several million dollars, and Chaum holds key patents...it is hard to imagine any of us competing head on...and make no mistake about it: a "Pretty Good Digital Cash" scheme would, on the whole, be a much larger project than PGP was), etc.
I suppose my point was that Chaum seems to be seeing what is happening out there, (CommerceNet) and has decided he can make things happen by opening up things a little bit. I applaud this. I was egging him on. I was *not* trying to get my tail-feathers fried. My analysis may be simplistic, but when Digicash Inc. says this:
Payment from any personal computer to any other workstation, over email or Internet, has been demonstrated for the first time, using electronic cash technology.
I figure that somebody acted. Somebody wrote code. Is it shipping? I have a product I'm dying to sell this way right now. Maybe I should wait a day before I post when I get excited about something... As it is, I feel like Garth and/or Wayne. "I'm not worthy!, I'm not worthy!" I really didn't want get into it with Tim May of all people... How many lawns do I have to mow to pay for the window, mister? ;-). ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923
I figure that somebody acted. Somebody wrote code. Is it shipping? I have a product I'm dying to sell this way right now. I'd like to hear something about this. If you don't want to talk about the product or it's means of delivery, fine. We're talking finance here now. My questions are: Total yearly expected revenue -- gives an idea about how much revenue is available to create intermediation. Distribution of buyers of the transactions -- is this more like a vending machine or a subscription service? A question of relative efficiency between identifier systems and cash systems. Total number of transactions -- gives an idea of the cost per transaction and the amount of capability to provide that number of transactions. Distribution of the amounts of the transactions -- are the amounts fixed, clustered, flat, or what? This also affects the relative efficiency of various systems. Distribution in time of the transactions -- another cost-to- rovide figure; peak load is important. If you don't want to discuss this in public, I also understand. Eric
In the interests of brevity, I'll make my points without quoting Robert Hettinga's article. 1. Like I said a couple of times, no flaming was intended. I was only urging what I ordinarily urge, that super-enthusiastic newcomers get some idea of context, the better to see how ideas fit together and the better to avoid making "Cypherpunks are doing enough" types of comments in any form. 2. Many newcomers seem to arrive on the List excited about the Glowing Digital Future and then learn that things are not on the verge of Happening....some of them urge us to "Do something!" or aver that we are not really "writing code." I think it's important that Cypherpunks understand that Changing the World is exciting, and likely, but will not happen easily or casually, and that most Cypherpunks are not able to work on things full-time, with budgets, assistants, etc. 3. Enthusiasm is good. In fact, it is necessary. But too many newcomers arrrive on the list, rail against the lack of progress in some area they favor, and then either leave the list or become dormant. A few become coders of important new capabilities, or analysts of events and directions. 4. I urge all those interested in digital cash, Chaumnian anonymity, etc., to read the many articles. These have been cited many times, and are referenced at the soda site. "Scientific American" had an article in July 1992 on this, for example. And as we have said so many times, the "Crypto" Conference Proceedings (and Eurocrypt, Auscrypt) carry the key research articles. 5. Robert mentioned "egging Chaum on" with his comments. Let me assure you all, Chaum does not need egging on by cheerleaders...he does not even read this List, and the stakes in digital cash are so enormously high that our comments are as nothing. I'm just being realistic here. 6. What we can do is to continue to prepare for this, to look for technial or political weaknesses in proposed protocols, lobby others we may talk to, and so on. Just as with other aspects of crypto. It is also remotely possible that a Zimmermann-like person (or group) may develop a PGDC scheme. Maybe. But PGP took PRZ a lot of time, and that of the v 2.0 crew that helped (many of them on this List!), and hence it may not be too likely for a while. (Also, absent banks that will honor PGDC--though some efforts may change this--the challenge will be enormous. And straight encryption is vastly more understandable, conceptually and practically, than digital cash protocols.) 7. The "voice encryption" is probably more important right now, and much "easier" to implement. It also can be done by independent groups without as much need for "buy-ins" by institutions. In any case, the "occupational disease" of Cypherpunks is to become convinced that some facet of crypto is so important that all other efforts should be abandoned. In the past, we have had folks strenuously argue that random number generators were crucial, others that "stealth PGP" was by far the number one priority. And so on. 8. We're an anarchic band. Lots of advantages here (nobody to arrest and charge with the crimes of the group, strenth in diversity, etc.). Some disadvantages, of course. In any case, no budget, no staff, no formal goals, no group projects. Only what sufficiently-motivated individuals or small groups will choose to work on. Thus, most of the "we all ought to work on X" posts are flawed. We may slip into this language as shorthand for saying we think something is especially important, but is seriously in error to ever think that we can make something a "group" goal. This came up in a different, non-technical context several weeks ago when one bunch wanted Cypherpunks to become a "spokesperson" group (like EFF), with a database of "resumes" of oppononents of Clipper ("to show that not all Clipper opponents are hippie hackers" or somesuch) and when another bunch (or one or two people) wanted Cypherpunks to become a lobbying group. In both cases, failure of the others to rally behind these proposals produced apparent anger or frustration on the part of the proponents. Which was too bad, but typical of an anarchy. ("Herding cats" is the usual metaphor.) Robert Hettinga writes:
I figure that somebody acted. Somebody wrote code. Is it shipping? I have a product I'm dying to sell this way right now.
It will likely be at least a few years, in my estimation, before enought peopole are using this so as to create a market. Meanwhile, sell your product the normal way...unless the privacy/anonymity issues are critical, why wait?
Maybe I should wait a day before I post when I get excited about something... As it is, I feel like Garth and/or Wayne. "I'm not worthy!, I'm not worthy!" I really didn't want get into it with Tim May of all people...
How many lawns do I have to mow to pay for the window, mister? ;-).
Just read the articles. You don't have to be a number theory expert, debating birthday paradoxes with Eli Brandt, Hal Finney, Jay PP, Eric Hughes, and the other number theory savvy folks, but some overall sense of where things are going (and where they have been, etc.) is best gotten from the literature. Cheers, --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."
participants (3)
-
hughes＠ah.com -
rah＠shipwright.com -
tcmay＠netcom.com