no government regulation of the net (was Re: bulk postage fine)

? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} dformosa at
Mon Aug 4 05:11:58 PDT 1997


On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Adam Back wrote:

> David Formosa <dformosa at> writes:


> > You got to be jokeing, what about alomost every AOL vs. Cyberpromo or
> > Compuserve vs. Cyberpromo or all thouse other ISPs against Cyberpromo.


> Government backed legal systems are inefficient.  A purely anonymous
> transaction where both parties identity is well concealed is much more
> efficient.

I have truble seeing this working protocol wise,  what is to stop me
taking the money and running (or the product and running).  For some
things such as text and grafics it is possable to use a bye a bit type
protocol.  But for something like the password to the GAK database you
would have have trubble negosating the protocol without someone getting
ripped off.

>  There is no one to sue.  Fighting legal suits is expensive, especially
> in the US.


> Third party arbitrators holding with a copy of
> the contract, a deposit from each party in escrow, and a reputation as
> a fair arbitrator is much more efficient.

So the escrow agent will get sued instead of you. These agents will have
to pay massive insurance rates and thuse be very expencive to use.

There seems to be an underlieing object of this schem to screw the lawers.
While this is a wounderfull aim I don't think that this schem will do it
as most escrow agents are lawers or soliciters.

> It'll probably help if the arbitration service is anonymous also,

I don't see how you can mainige the joint targets of anonymousaty and
reputation in this schem.  I would be interested if you can.


> > The spammers if there advertising a servese will need someway for me to
> > contact them.  Some way for me to get the goods.  Just anonomising the
> > email will not hide there identy.  
> True.  But how do you prove to one of these inefficent government
> courts that it is indeed the spam beneficiary who posted the spam.

Look at there email logs, paychecks to Spamford ect in the discovery


> > Any way pushing spammer email though most email remailers will cause
> > them to crash from sheare volume.
> That's also not a good thing.

I didn't say it was.  Most likely the anon-admins will make use of
throtelers to stop e-spaming (I beleave thay do this for mail bombs)

- -- 
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  ex-net.scum and proud
You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For
Themselves? --Terry Pratchett

Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv


More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list