E-gold Court Documents

[R.A. Hettinga]

On Jul 23, 2008, at 12:08 PM, John Young wrote:

> lawyers



At the core of e-gold was a very strong belief that "regulatory  
arbitrage", as Eric Hughes called it here on cypherpunks, was actually  
possible. In many ways, Barry Downey was a legal genius. It seemed to  
me that were more domiciles operated in by e-gold than there are  
thoraxes (thoraces?) in the Arctic National Mosquito Refuge at Summer  
Solstice.

Apparently, that trick never works, as Tim May -- possibly channeling  
June Foray :-) -- was constantly saying. Unfortunately, the crypto we  
on cypherpunks wanted to solve the problem with isn't cheap enough to  
replace book-entry transactions and turn the tide from "transparency"  
back to privacy. So far.

There are indications (identity "theft", for instance) that the closer  
you get to instantaneity of transactions, the more expensive identity- 
based, and thus book-entry, transaction settlement gets. However, what  
we really need is something in the opposite direction, a kind of  
Moore's Law for digital bearer financial cryptography protocols,  
something that shows us that the closer we get to T-0 transaction  
settlement, the cheaper digital bearer transactions on ubiquitous  
internetworks get, and preferably exponentially so.

Frankly, I would prefer the absence of a special case, needing an  
asymptote at T-0 to go run and hide behind, but I expect any freedom- 
loving financial professional would take anything he could get at this  
point.


In the meantime, remember that "National Technical Means" includes  
rubber hoses, folks.


"The direct use of physical force is so poor a solution to the problem  
of limited resources that it is commonly employed only by small  
children and great nations."

-David Friedman, 'The Machinery of Freedom'

"Tell that to the Tutsis in Rwanda."

--Timothy C. May

And, apparently, Dr. Jackson, Mr. Downey, et al...

Cheers,
RAH