David Molnar asks:
> The recent article reminds me -- did anyone see Tomas Sander and
> Matt Franklin's presentation at CFP on "Deniable Payments and
> Electronic Campaign Finance"? What did you think?
>
> http://www.cfp2000.org/papers/franklin.pdf
>
> Their idea is to take the "mandated donor anonymity" proposed by
> Ian Ayres & Jeremy Bulow
> http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/faculty/bulow.pdf
>
> and build a protocol which allows everyone to ensure that donations are
> going to the correct candidate, without revealing anything about who
> donated to whom.
You should ask on one of the real crypto lists, [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Most cypherpunks subscribers are too stupid to
have an opinion (that means you, Choate).
Actually these proposals were discussed a few months ago on one of
the lists. There are philosophical issues (you can't stop under the
table payments without invasive monitoring of campaign activities which
inherently infringe on free speech), and technical issues (large donors
are the only ones who can buy influence, and their contributions tend to
be noticeable even if they are anonymized, requiring elaborate smoothing
mechanisms which undercut campaign effectiveness).
Cypherpunks would generally prefer a laissez faire approach to campaign
donations, rather than more regulations on how money can be given, even if
the restrictions use cryptography.
