On 2011-06-15 1:29 AM, Ian G wrote:
Which, to my mind was the same sin as the alternate: obsession with
privacy, including to the extent of eliminating the core requirements of
money. The first law of money is that it has to be safe:


This is the fundamental reason why we have reversable transactions in
systems to account for money ... (whatever we think of the result, there
is a reason why we have that feature).

This is also why nymous (public-key identified) transaction systems will
always beat out coin-based (blinded) systems in the long run.

This seems inconsistent with the May scale of monetary hardness, and the ancient appeal of gold money.

Reversible (soft) money has to have at its foundation irreversible and final hard money. Thus, in the days of the gold standard, all the banks would do final settlement in gold, and people tended to pay in banknotes.
cryptography mailing list

Reply via email to