[118005] in Cypherpunks
RE: Will this replace banking?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert Hettinga)
Fri Sep 17 13:54:47 1999
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <v04210147b4082a18d354@[204.167.101.56]>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 13:25:57 -0400
To: cryptography@c2.net, cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
--- begin forwarded text
Reply-To: <reid@free-market.net>
From: "Reid" <reid@free-market.net>
To: "E-Gold Discussion List (E-mail)" <e-gold-list@free-market.net>
Subject: e-gold: RE: Will this replace banking?
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:28:19 -0400
Sender: owner-e-gold-list@free-market.net
--- begin forwarded text
-----Original Message-----
From: dbs@philodox.com [mailto:dbs@philodox.com] On Behalf Of Ian Grigg
Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 9:14 AM
To: dbs@philodox.com; rah@shipwright.com
Subject: Re: Will this replace banking?
> This is the financial equivalent of security through obscurity. It is
> no substitute for mathematically protected privacy.
Hah! Surely you can do better than that? In fact this article
has got me bemused, the style seems familiar, but the content
has a newby flavour.
Assuming you're new to the FC game:
The whole movement of "blinding or bust" went the obvious way,
bust. This post is not really space to indicate why it was
a non-starter, but mail on dbs@philodox.com will respond with
some clues.
What is happening now is a new generation of attempts, chief
amongst which is the e-gold guys, who have developed their
plans from a marketing angle, which is somewhat healthier and
more likely than the original pioneers.
One thing the new generation aren't doing is chasing down the
blind alley of a formula. I suppose this is a lesson learnt in
every new industry - there is a business behind the business.
Assuming you aren't new to the game:
Gimme a break! Why are you criticising the guys who've done
more to help this game than the sum of DigiCash, Cybercash,
FV, and who knows who else? If you'd done your research, you
would have found:
a. e-gold makes the most sense when issuing a currency,
an observation that is orthogonal to technology, and
not an original one by any stretch of the imagination.
b. WebFunds is a multi-wallet system. It's up to you
to add some sort of blinding formula if you are keen
enough. It is (supposed to be) open source, although
we haven't got the anon source out yet, and accounts
only go to people I know coz the machine needs to be
secure. It's early days, and nobody has announced
anything yet.
c. The difference between blinding and a non-blinding
system is, at an optimistic maximum, 10% of the protocol,
and 1% of the code. Do I have to amplify this point?
d. People with money at risk don't want blinding, they
want a system that works. DigiGold works, with some
flaws, and some features. That gets 9 marks, against
blinding's one mark. Blinding's out of the game until
someone can start shipping coins.
e. The e-gold guys have said they want to do blinding.
They've always said it. But since they've got involved,
they've discovered some of the non-techie aspects that
make blinding - er - more difficult. They've adjusted
their strategy accordingly.
f. You did do your "research" in one area, but failed to
pick up the beginner's clue. That article was written by
someone who was non technical. Nothing in there represents
anything that is claimed by the people who write the
software. I.e., no "level of financial privacy" has been
promised by either technology, so your post is deviod of
relevance.
It's over to you, in all senses of the question. You want it,
you write it, or you pay for it. You go speak to the regulators,
and you raise the capital.
But don't go sniping at others who have put their capital at
risk, and are actually doing what needs to be done. Especially,
don't base it on claims made in the popular press, you'll have
too much to write about, and you won't raise any capital if the
investors read it.
iang
--- end forwarded text
--- end forwarded text
-----------------
Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
