CDR: Re: Nyms and reputations.

Igor Chudov ichudov at Algebra.Com
Sat Oct 28 12:09:52 PDT 2000


Most of these problems are solved by the use of bonds posted by parties.

igor

Ray Dillinger wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
> 
> >Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here
> >-- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous
> >transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I
> >dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much
> >money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise...
> 
> I've been thinking pretty much the same thing lately.  When you 
> do business with someone, you want to know his/her True Name, so 
> that if they 'defect' (ie, take your money on a long trip to the 
> bahamas without delivering the goods, or take your goods on a long 
> trip to the bahamas without giving you the promised money) you can 
> drag their asses into court and get what they promised you. 
> 
> Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym.  And 
> the hellish thing about Nyms is, they don't cost anything.  If the 
> guy (or gal) steals from you using a Nym, you can spread the word 
> about that nym and trash its reputation.  But they don't have to 
> care, because by this time they'll be using another nym.  With 
> Nyms, somebody who has ripped off a hundred people for a million 
> dollars each is indistinguishable from someone who's just new to 
> the system. While Nyms have zero cost, they will never simultaneously 
> be in use and have negative reputation.
> 
> It is also very hard to get a positive reputation with a nym; 
> (switching to didactic mode). 
> 
> Either you are doing a legal business or an illegal business.
>    If you are doing a Legal business:
>    A customer can go to either a nym or a true name. 
>        If a customer goes to a nym, there is no legal recourse, 
>        but if a customer goes to a true name, there is legal recourse. 
>        Therefore it is clearly better for the customer to go to a true 
>        name.
>    
>    If you are doing an illegal business:
>    You either do, or do not, create a "reference" as a result 
>    of the transaction. 
> 
>       If no reference is created, no reputation can be gained. QED.
>  
>       If a reference is created, then it either does, or does not, 
>       identify the principals and the deal consummated. 
> 
>             If the reference identifies the principals and the deal  
>             then it can also be used as conclusive proof in court
>             against them if the owner of either nym is ever discovered. 
>             And this is the best kind of "digital reputation" I can 
>             find in this system.  It will be significant to someone 
>             else who has dealt with one of the principals as an 
>             introduction to the other, but cannot really be useful 
>             beyond that. 
> 
> 	If the reference does not identify the principals and the 
>         deal consummated, then either it does not identify the principals 
>         or it does not identify the deal consummated. 
> 
>             If the reference does not identify the principals in the 
>             deal, then it can be duplicated at will by anyone who 
>             creates a few Nyms and puts them through the paces of a 
>             few pretended deals, and is therefore meaningless. 
> 
> 	    If the reference does not identify the deal consummated, 
>             then it becomes impossible to make judgements based upon 
>             it. -- a cocaine dealer with a million-dollar shipment is 
>             hardly going to accept a "reference" which might be based 
>             on the purchase or sale of a pocketknife.  Such references 
>             are also meaningless.
> 
> 				Bear
> 



	- Igor.





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list