At 04:34 PM 8/20/04 -0500, Matt Crawford wrote: >>> I'm wondering how applicable RPOW is. > >If you think of POW as a possible SPAM mitigation
As spam mitigation, it might work better than hashcash. As cash, it lacks the anonymity of "bearer-documents (tm)" since there is one clearing house. This might be improved via support for a system of mostly independent clearing houses which also interchange at interchange places. However, those would likely be regulated by the Powers That Be, ergo not alleviating my concerns about anonymity. My 2 dinars. ================================================= 36 Laurelwood Dr Irvine CA 92620-1299 VOX: (714) 544-9727 (home) mnemonic: P1G JIG WRAP ICBM: -117.7621, 33.7275 HTTP: http://68.5.216.23:81 (back up, but not 99.999% reliable) PGP PUBLIC KEY: by arrangement Send plain ASCII text not HTML lest ye be misquoted ------ "Don't 'sir' me, young man, you have no idea who you're dealing with" Tommy Lee Jones, MIB ---- No, you're not 'tripping', that is an emu ---Hank R. Hill --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]