Craig Spencer wrote:
>
> Julian Morrison wrote:
>
> > a) If you do business with unidentified people, you can be dragged into
> > their crimes, you can be swindled, and you can help crime in general
> > prosper.
>
> Strictly speaking the problem is not that they are unidentified. It is
> that they are criminals. Identification may filter out some of the
> criminals but it does not filter out all of them and it interferes
> with some perfectly legitimate business.
> > The main problem with (a) assuming you're smart enough not to buy into a
> > scam is that of unidirectional anonymity. They know and can tell that
> > they dealt with you; you don't know them from Adam.
>
> I don't see why unidirectional anonymity *per se* is a problem. Unless
> you mean it allows the innocent, identified party to be scapegoated for
> the crimes of the unknown. ???
Exactly. They can drag you into their mess, you can't see them
beforehand and avoid the problem. Then the cops come knocking at *your*
door, come to take away your servers as evidence and to ask you all
sorts of irritating questions.
> > [... automated double-blind MM ...]
>
> That would be a good business. But I don't see it as addressing the
> crime problem.
It's one half of the possible solution: near-perfect "money laundering".
The only people with any records of the transaction per se are e-gold,
and the two parties. You just matched them up via some double-blind
system that prevents you from having the opportunity to log anything
that could incriminate you. Much like Hushmail's concept.
> I think this is a good and promising idea. But I am not sure it is a
> complete solution. It would have to be tried and its consequences
> observed.
>
> [... path server suggeston ...]
>
> I find the potential in this very promising. But how effective this
> method actually would be can only only be discovered by trying it.
Hmm. A good trust provider would be doing most if not all of that, plus
tracking user ratings and comments a-la ebay, but it would have to be
designed to be less tediously technical in day-to-day use.
A good quality reputation system could be set up perhaps rather similar
to e-gold's spend system: to log them in you hand them over to the
reputation provider with some details (who you are, what you want them
qualified for, etc), they handle the authentication, and pass the user
back across plus their pseudonym and rep rating.
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
