[24950] in Cypherpunks
Re: for-pay remailers and FV
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Hughes)
Fri Jan 6 23:33:18 1995
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 20:28:17 -0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9501061816.A25172-0100000@netcom10> (jamesd@netcom.com)
From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@netcom.com>
On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Eric Hughes wrote:
> This whole fracas between blind-sig money and FV money is a symptom of
> the confusion between clearing and settlement.
It is nothing to do with that confusion.
Keep your day job.
> To wit, a remailer consortium would do best to issue a local banknote
> usable only by themselves and have customers settle with the
> consortium issuer, rather than any member of the consortium itself.
> If the consortium issuer were to use blind sigs, the consortium
> members wouldn't be able to ascertain who paid.
Get it? The first sentence refers to a "local banknote". The second
sentence refers to a particular way of issuing that banknote. Passage
from the general to the specific.
The problem that we are discussing is how to solve them
without using Chaumian money.
Think about how a local clearing organization allows this.
Eric
