Re: bearer = anonymous = freedom to contract

[Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>]

Robert Hettinga wrote:
> > I still claim that your insistance on offline clearing is a mistake that
> >limits your options and the possibilities for ecommerce.
> 
> I know you know the difference between on-line and offline transactions in
> financial cryptography, so it seems to me that you're saying that anything
> which doesn't immediately go through a bank must be "offline", right?
> 
> And, of course, your redefinition of a cryptographic term of art has
> nothing to do with the fact that you work for the American Banking
> Association, does it, Kawika?
> 
> ;-)
> 
> Look, you can have a box in a rack on the internet in which a digital
> bearer transaction executes, clears, and settles all at once. David Chaum
> and Ron Rivest calls these boxes "mints". I call the owner of these boxes
> "underwriters", which is what they're doing, financialy. And,
> cryptographically, if you redeem and reissue these transactions at every
> transaction, they are called *online* transactions.

Perhaps I'm being dim, but I can't see any difference between these
boxes of yours and what Kawika calls a "bank". Am I missing something?

Or is the argument simply about who is allowed to own these boxes?

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
     - Indira Gandhi

For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"dcsb-request@ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help".