At 01:36 PM 9/26/99 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There are two reasons. First, as you say below, there is simply the reality of
>there being multiple systems. Second, and more essential, there are some
>important advantages e.g. in efficiency to non-anonymous payment mechanisms.
>BTW, non-anonymous here does not necessarily mean `identity-based`, but
rather,
>payment mechanism which do not offer complete, secure anonymity. The
problem is
>of course that if such non-anonymous payment mechanisms are common, it may
I wonder, if anonymous systems should get the lion's share of attention so
that the shoe is on the other foot, how will you see this situation?
>become difficult to convince merchants to support also an anonymous payment
>mechanism (with relatively few customers - assuming most customers will not be
>willing to `pay` for the anonymity).
There is no reason to expect anonymous system will be more expensive than
the current book-entry variety, in fact quite the contrary.
Furthermore customers choosing the
>anonymous mechanism may attract attention to themselves (I guess the use of
>`anonymous` for e-mail is a good example!).
No more than cash.
--Steve
