Fwd: [Cryptography] A possible alternative to TOR and PrivaTegrity without backdoors

jim bell jdb10987 at yahoo.com
Wed Jan 20 00:39:15 PST 2016



 From: coderman <coderman at gmail.com>
 To: jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> 

On 1/14/16, jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ... The main criticism I had
>> of this was the fact that the system was said to have a minimum bid of 1
>> BTC, which at the time was somewhere around $1000.  This, contrasting with
>> my Assassination Politics essay of 1995-96 where I anticipated allowing bits
>> of 10 cents.
>> Assassination Market did not explain a lot of what I had considered
>> necessary for a functioning such system. How can a potential donor trust the
>> system?  How can a potential 'predictor' trust the system?  How to collect?I
>> never tried to research into this, because I judged that to do so would be a
>> little too 'hot' for me to do.

>i am curious how you arrived at a determination of what was "too hot" :)>how do you pick where to draw that line?>*he says with a toe on something very hot...*
It was more of an educated guess.  I knew that I hadn't been promoting AP, yetsomebody was seemingly trying to bring it into reality, or saying they were.  Themost likely scenario, given that this person had contacted me, is that he (they) weresimply trying to discredit me.  To avoid that happening, and to 'kill two birds withone stone', I threw that hot potato to Andy Greenberg.  (I was not at all happy with Greenberg, who greatly misrepresented 'facts' about me in his book).   I figuredthat Greenberg wouldn't do anything with this contact, which would allow me to usehis negligence to discredit him.  Very surprisingly, to me, Greenberg actually wrotean article and published in Forbes!  Literally within hours, many dozen other articles appeared in other media, and in the end it probably was hundreds of articlesover the next year or so.

>>  Did any donations actually appear on the
>> system after its initial announcement?  Did any new names/targets appear?
>there were a few targets added, "bid" transactions successful,
>yet my attempt to add my own life to list was for naught. :/
>maybe i didn't pay enough... ?
 > https://blockchainbdgpzk.onion/address/1P6yannm6Rx9kkMH5LxmAsi1GdZ4JZG73T
I expected to, within a few weeks or months, read many articles publishing details.  But no,all the rest were seemingly just rehashes of Greenberg's.   So, I learned very little.  ButI _DID_ learn that that system wouldn't be successful:  At the very least, it would have hadto convince the public that they could trust the system to operate reliably, and that neveroccurred.The only public criticism I voiced was the fact that the system didn't accept individual donationslower than 1 BTC.  Most people would be willing to throw a penny, nickel, dime, quarter, ordollar into a wishing well.  But nearly $1000?  Highly unlikely.  It was one choice that virtually guaranteed failure, even if everything else was done right. I am now, however, paying attention to Auger and Ethereum, which if they meet their impliedpromises, will actually do the job.
        Jim Bell


   

  
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 9291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160120/33015cd1/attachment-0002.txt>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list