On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
>Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here
>-- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous
>transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I
>dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much
>money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise...
I've been thinking pretty much the same thing lately. When you
do business with someone, you want to know his/her True Name, so
that if they 'defect' (ie, take your money on a long trip to the
bahamas without delivering the goods, or take your goods on a long
trip to the bahamas without giving you the promised money) you can
drag their asses into court and get what they promised you.
Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym. And
the hellish thing about Nyms is, they don't cost anything. If the
guy (or gal) steals from you using a Nym, you can spread the word
about that nym and trash its reputation. But they don't have to
care, because by this time they'll be using another nym. With
Nyms, somebody who has ripped off a hundred people for a million
dollars each is indistinguishable from someone who's just new to
the system. While Nyms have zero cost, they will never simultaneously
be in use and have negative reputation.
It is also very hard to get a positive reputation with a nym;
(switching to didactic mode).
Either you are doing a legal business or an illegal business.
If you are doing a Legal business:
A customer can go to either a nym or a true name.
If a customer goes to a nym, there is no legal recourse,
but if a customer goes to a true name, there is legal recourse.
Therefore it is clearly better for the customer to go to a true
name.
If you are doing an illegal business:
You either do, or do not, create a "reference" as a result
of the transaction.
If no reference is created, no reputation can be gained. QED.
If a reference is created, then it either does, or does not,
identify the principals and the deal consummated.
If the reference identifies the principals and the deal
then it can also be used as conclusive proof in court
against them if the owner of either nym is ever discovered.
And this is the best kind of "digital reputation" I can
find in this system. It will be significant to someone
else who has dealt with one of the principals as an
introduction to the other, but cannot really be useful
beyond that.
If the reference does not identify the principals and the
deal consummated, then either it does not identify the principals
or it does not identify the deal consummated.
If the reference does not identify the principals in the
deal, then it can be duplicated at will by anyone who
creates a few Nyms and puts them through the paces of a
few pretended deals, and is therefore meaningless.
If the reference does not identify the deal consummated,
then it becomes impossible to make judgements based upon
it. -- a cocaine dealer with a million-dollar shipment is
hardly going to accept a "reference" which might be based
on the purchase or sale of a pocketknife. Such references
are also meaningless.
Bear
