On Sun, 12 May 2002, Sandy Harris wrote:
> Why do you imagine that?
Paranoia and trust I'd imagine.
> Those guys don't understand the technologies behind paper money -- engraving,
> paper making, holography, ... -- or behind bank accounts and ATM machines,
> and they likely don't have credible threats against the mint or the banks.
Exactly, you're the one confusing 'use' with 'being able to reproduce'.
Why do these folks use money? Because it's universal and culturaly
acceptable.
> There is a chicken-and-egg problem.
Actually not,
> Joe, Gord and Jeff will happily use any system that is widespread enough to
> be credible, but how does some system get there?
By convincing some group of others in addition to Joe, Gord, and Jeff they
will recieve a benefit for such use. It must 'profit' them.
> That probably requires that early adopters understand
> things and believe they have recourse against botching implementers.
No, it requires a general change in perspective of the market. Almost
everyone must agree that it's useful, though unproven. And then let folks
try to prove its utility.
--
____________________________________________________________________
The law is applied philosophy and a philosphical system is
only as valid as its first principles.
James Patrick Kelly - "Wildlife"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.open-forge.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
