[44996] in Cypherpunks
Re: More FUD from First Virtual
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim bell)
Fri Dec 8 12:56:48 1995
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 09:41:32 -0800
To: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb+limbo@nsb.fv.com>
From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
At 06:51 AM 12/8/95 -0500, you wrote:
>Excerpts from mail.limbo: 7-Dec-95 More FUD from First Virtual Douglas
>Barnes@communiti (1157*)
>
>I *am* skeptical about the extent to which anonymous cash *can* succeed,
What can stop it? What should stop it?
>but in point of fact I'd like to help. I think society will be better
>off if one of the payment options is truly anonymous. I think that
>level of privacy will inevitably carry a high surcharge, however, for
>reasons that I keep pointing out and you keep ignoring.
Well, maybe I haven't been following those reasons, but I see little or no
reason privacy should "inevitably carry a high surcharge." If the relevant
encryptions had to be carried out with a pencil and a piece of paper, that
claim would make sense, but remember, we've got MICROPROCESSORS on our side!
I agree, I suppose, that there are definitely entities (read: governments)
which would WANT to prevent the use of anonymous cash, but I view them more
of an obstacle to be removed than a permanent bar.
