[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
> RAH writes:
> > ...an argument for bearer credentials if there ever was one...
 
[...snip...]

> In fact if anything this kind of prosecution is an argument *against*
> getting into the ecash/ecredential business, especially if it is focused
> on porn as some have proposed.  All you need is for someone to use it
> to sell or authorize access to kiddie porn, and you're going to jail.

I'd like to see the cops trying to arrest the Bank of England.

Ken

Reply via email to