Who wants to be a millionaire

[Steve Furlong]

mattd wrote:
> 
> Bin laden demolitions has authorised me to offer you a once in a lifetime deal.
> 1million dollars untracable digital cash will be paid to an account/s of
> your choice
> for enough intelligence to proceed with further superpower implosions.
> Insider info preffered but not essential,leave packet online in freenet
> transient node...

Is there any way to solve this transaction problem without a
mutually-trusted third party?

If BLD and the information supplier each trusted that the other actually
possessed and was providing the information desired by the other, they
could do a one-bit-at-a-time exchange.

If the transaction were "legitimate", they could do an ordinary transfer
with legal recourse if one party cheated.

If they were able to find a third party they both trusted, he could
examine both sides' materials and release them if both were
satisfactory.

Meeting face to face would be dangerous for both parties, but more so
for the information supplier.

But say the information supplier didn't really support the goals of BLD,
but just wanted the money. He wouldn't trust the same kinds of people
and institutions that BLD would. There used to be amoral bankers who
would act as middlemen, no questions asked, but I get the impression
they're pretty much all shut down. Assuming that the two parties were
not able to find anyone they both trusted, and couldn't rely on the rule
of law to punish dishonesty, and didn't want to meet face-to-face, how
could the supplier and BLD conduct a mutually-secure transaction?


Steve Furlong

-- 
Steve Furlong    Computer Condottiere   Have GNU, Will Travel
  617-670-3793

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly
while bad people will find a way around the laws." -- Plato