Re: Brands excluded from digicash beta
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Yes, it is granted that Digicash is in beta, and not polished. But beta testing usually happens after all significant functionality is present. The Digicash beta isn't moving real money, and that's a significant functional deficit.
Couldn't we make a similar argument against digital commerce systems in general? Most of the things I want to buy aren't available online, so what good are net based transactions? In a sense that's true, but at the same time it seems clear that eventually one or more systems with goods and services I want to buy (at prices I want to pay) will emerge. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't be very interested in the topic. Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I don't know about (always a possibility), the things I've heard about the beta test make me believe that a functional transaction system from that company will probably be released.
Who can say? It hasn't been released for real. Clearing and settlement in a payments system are _most_ of the problem, not sugar coating. FV is leveraging Visa for settlement, but Digicash currently has nothing.
I can understand why you'd need Visa's permission if you're going to be using a system that uses that credit card to process transactions. But if DigiCash feels their system is secure, what would stop them from just selling digital currency on their own? They could say that they'll sell e-dollars for $1, and buy them for $0.95. Assuming they keep the revenue from currency sales in something low risk and they committ to making a market, wouldn't that be enough to get things rolling? Individuals or banks all over the world could set up operations which convert e-currency to and from $US, working inside of the buy/sell spread set up by Digicash. On top of that, they'd get the interest income on the funds that back all the digital dollars, which would be a large source of income in addition to what they would make from the software. If there's someone I can go to who will give me cash for digital currency, I'll take digital currency as a payment for any goods and services I sell. If someone else will give me a check for the digicash, what does my banker have to say about it? == Alex Strasheim | finger astrashe@nyx.cs.du.edu alex@omaha.com | for my PGP 2.6.1. public key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLuEn4REpP7+baaPtAQGSbwP/ccN3dvugcEgFg9lG6DuFw2JzdltDd63C 5ZkMiDMkbWly3i0d+TI5OGTFPoafjDaBRieaoCzsrjsZAWQDVrscjwrvCa38GQDD aTZa3AF9pEixhVWN0pFiDcUx7ByO92fFexA6POHnZOvTSNws9wqQ4b1vnaofWQNE k4s0ji7x3NE= =+8TT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Alex Strasheim <alex@omaha.com> Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I don't know about (always a possibility), I have a simple rule of publicity here. If there were a bank who had already agreed to back ecash, would it not already have been announced? Since no announcement of the sort has been forthcoming, I conclude that the probability that such a backer exists right now is low. Eric
From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
From: Alex Strasheim <alex@omaha.com>
Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I don't know about (always a possibility),
I have a simple rule of publicity here. If there were a bank who had already agreed to back ecash, would it not already have been announced? Since no announcement of the sort has been forthcoming, I conclude that the probability that such a backer exists right now is low.
Unless said bank wanted to set up the necessary infrastructure and possibly work in back ends to home-banking software and other pieces that make such a system usable for "real people." In all likelyhood your conclusion is most likely erroneous. jim
Alex Strasheim writes
Unless Digicash has significant problems with banks or governments that I don't know about (always a possibility), the things I've heard about the beta test make me believe that a functional transaction system from that company will probably be released.
It seems that some bankers are pissed at Digicash, for reasons very similar to the reasons that some cypherpunks are pissed at Digicash. As I said earlier, ninety percent of success is turning up. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we James A. Donald are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. jamesd@acm.org
participants (4)
-
Alex Strasheim -
eric@remailer.net -
jamesd@netcom.com -
mccoy@io.com