[116707] in Cypherpunks
RAH Muscles In On Secure E-Commerce
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Wed Aug 18 19:20:46 1999
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 00:50:34 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <199908182250.AAA14748@mail.replay.com>
From: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
To: dbs@philodox.com, dcsb@ai.mit.edu, cypherpunks@toad.com
Reply-To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
> Robert Hettinga sez:
>
> As most of us know by now, banks are the only "certification
> authorities" that matter, because the only thing worth "certifying"
> is money. Banks are finally figuring this out.
>
> More to the point, banks will soon discover that even identity
> certification is superfluous. They only have to know that a given
> key is authorized to add or remove a given amount from a given
> book-entry, and everything else costs money. The next step after
> that in reduced latency and lowered transaction cost is
> cryptographic value objects: digital bearer financial instruments,
> in other words.
>
> "Real-time gross settlement" *is* digital bearer settlement.
>
> Cheers,
> RAH
well of course there is a long history on usenet and mailing lists of
asserting yourself as an authority when in fact you have no clue what
you are talking about. often this deception is so complete even the
poster is convinced of their absolute and compelling authority. as
if by blunt force of will the truth can be bludgeoned into some
desired shape, twisted though it may be.
so it makes sense and in fact is no real surprise that RAH would be
the latest "authority" to try this little trick. I say "no real
surprise" because RAH has been legend in this field, that of the
pretender to the throne of authority. Ive watched quietly for some
time while our old friend ranted on, mixing subjects on which he
actually might be an authority with those in which he clearly
possesses not a clue. the tell-tale signs and tactics of dillusion
are all there. in this post too. behold the use of such classics
as: "its too bad you're not as smart as the rest of us" aka "as most
of us know by now..." of "you too can join the ranks of us
intelligent types" aka "banks are finally figuring this out" and the
"sherlock holmes syndrome" here in the form of a long chain of
assumptions ending in a "simple" equation with complex and
unexplained terms of art designed to amaze the uninitiated with the
blinding glory of RAHs massive financial vocabulary "real time gross
settlement *is* digital bearer settlement." a bravado performance,
doubtless.
I remember when the "clueful" used to actually bother to argue with
RAH. every third post usually had some contributor with _legitimate_
credentials in a given field pointing out gently, or not so gently,
the glaring errors in RAHs assumptions or assertions. usually these
posters would merely be inundated with raving and meandering
circumlocution, distraction, straw men and misdirection for their
trouble. tv's lost hero "the equalizer" could not have equaled such
verbal twistings on his best days. he did have a british accent
though, along with a much better understanding of the law than our
would be hero RAH. still RAH managed to sound smart most of the
time. sure, on some occasions outright profanity replaced those more
polite, if unconvincing, excretions. the occasional lapses of a
genius? well who can be sure? regardless I expect most of the
"clueful" have long since given up, been "invited" to leave, or
departed of their own volition. and who can blame them? we all
stopped watching "the equalizer" too. still, occasionally some straw
breaks the camels back and a frustrated member of the "clueful"
cartel will step in and try and set things right. lucky green is the
example in most recent memory.
why do we bother?
educate the ignorant at our own expense for what?
what surprises is that RAH is satisfied lording over a kingdom of
doting fools proclaiming news bulletins of fancy and invention month
after month, year after year, none of which vary much. surprising
that RAH would intentionally surround himself with suchlike and be
content to have his illusions, hallucinations and blusterings
ministered to. one remembers the carter administration's cabinet.
publicly indulging, or at least too indulging to raise any manner of
protest aloud, but silently always wondering. sure, a few resign,
stop contributing, yet the remaining are apparently enough for RAH.
so yes, it is no surprise that RAH would so badly mangle the meaning
of "real time gross settlement." Ive worked for 3 years with one of
europe's leading real time gross settlement implementers. I expect
that RAH had to look it up in the barrons banking handbook. if real
time gross settlement is all dbs would aspire to be then dbs'
aspirations are indeed unimpressive.
I will not even bother to address the amusing assertion that money is
the only thing worth certifying, as if it didn't matter who was at
the receiving end of a wire transfer, only if the money was not
counterfeit. perhaps RAH is impressing his court of fools and its
inner circle but not all of us find that circle very impressive.
this is why it is no surprise that RAH would extract from a simple
assertion that banks are forming their own CA networks some
otherworldly connection to "dbs", his reason detat, and its
inevitable predominance assuring his eventual fame and fortune and
place in the stars. perhaps dbs tokens will all take the form of
critical financial information crypto-stegoed into gif-icons of our
savior RAHenry VIII's benevolent, plush and rounded form.
its unfortunate that dbs has RAH as its primary, or at least its
loudest, supporter. otherwise perhaps the technology might actually
get somewhere with the people who have a clue.
> At 2:00 AM -0400 on 8/18/99, ecarm-news@ecarm.org wrote:
>
>
> > Title: Banks Muscle In On Secure E-Commerce
> > Resource Type: News Article
> > Date: Aug 17, 1999 (12:18 PM)
> > Source: TechWeb
> > Author: Madeleine Acey
> > Keywords: DIG CERTIFICATES,BUSINESS PRACT ,ONLINE BANKING
> ,USER AUTHENTICAT
> >
> > Abstract/Summary:
> > Digital certificate authorities could become superfluous to
> > e-commerce before they even make it off the ground as the world's
> > major banks set up pre-authorization services. The banks say they
> > are already in a trusted relationship with their customers and
> > that they are the natural "trusted party" for financial
> > transactions and for eliminating false identity risk.
...blah blah blah.
