At 10:24 AM -0700 10/17/00, Ray Dillinger wrote:

Basically, whether it's math or crypto, there are some ideas that people just aren't going to "get" because they always lump unfamiliar things together if those things violate the same assumption.

In math, they used to look at me blankly when I explained that there was more than one kind of infinity -- Or about transfinite numbers that *weren't* an infinity -- because they only know finite mathematics. Anything outside that realm is, well, infinity, and one infinity, as far as the sheeple are concerned, is as good as another.

Likewise, people who only understand speech and business mediated by absolute identities are going to have trouble with the "subtle" difference between anonymity and pseudonymity. It's a model where you are dealing with someone but don't know who they are, and as far as the sheeple are concerned, one not-knowing is as good as another. It violates the same assumption, therefore in popular view, it must be the same thing.

Very well said. This is indeed what's happening. More reason not to trust the laws of man. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.