On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:42:38 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <[email protected]> wrote:


> 
> >    Now, Chaum has a new cryptocoin :
> 
> >   https://elixxir.io/ 
> 
> 
> Looks quite promising.   Given that it is occurring after nearly 10 years of 
> the experience of Bitcoin and, subsequently, hundreds of other crypto coins, 
> it would have to be much advanced. 


        For what it's worth, a couple of bitcoin people I talked to were not 
impressed. Apparently Chaum's coin is "proof of stake" and PoS isn't robust 
enough. But I'm just repeating what they said. 

        But what caught my attention like I said is the use of a mixnet. 

        
> No doubt David Chaum wishes he'd managed to bring DigiCash to a world-wide 
> fruition, but he had the big disadvantage that the Internet didn't really 
> exist, to the average person. 

        Well digicash had good anonimity properties, so that probably was an 
incentive for banks to *not* use it. And it was based on government pseudo 
'money' so that was an incentive for users to avoid it. I think it was also 
patented? 


>  Somebody (probably not myself) should talk to Chaum about the use of Elixxir 
> in Dark-market applications.  

        heh =)


> 
> >    I don't know how good it is, or if it's even working (seems not), but if 
> >you take a look at their 'technical brief' you'll see they use a mixnet. My 
> >half educated guess is that only high latency mixnets may provide good 
> >enough anonimity.
> >   So, I was wondering, maybe it would make sense to get some bitcoin 
> >millonaire to fund some sort of mixnet? Such a project seems like a good fit 
> >for somebody like Roger Ver? What do you think Jim? Maybe you could sell the 
> >idea to him?
> 
> Like Zenaan, I don't think this will be very expensive.  It will be 
> intricate, but there will be plenty of money in Dark market insurance 
> payments.  Everybody (except those trying to enforce drug laws, for example) 
> would want to see this occur.  The operators of the Dark markets, as well as 
> the sellers, would love to see some guarantee of non-prosecution,
> And, I hesitate to approach anyone on this, 1-to-1.


        Oh sorry, my bad. I didn't mean to suggest that you talk to Ver about 
the whole idea. 

        My line of thinking was : Your insurance system requires good 
anonimity. Mixnets apparently can provide it. So the first step would be to set 
up a mixnet. And *that* first step is something that Ver might like to fund. 


>  Can I sell the idea directly to the operators of a Dark market?  Not likely, 
>in large part because nobody knows who they are, and they like it that way.  
>B^)  


        Well I haven't checked lately but dark markets usually have forums and 
the operators pay attention to them, to varying degrees. 



> I think there needs to be further discussion, for example on CP, as to this 
> idea.  What additional features?  Would it work?  But we should be cautious, 
> as usual:  Maybe the people doing the discussion should state that we have no 
> intention of actually, personally, implementing this idea. 

        Oh of course. We would never do anything 'illegal'  ^-^



> I should mention that such a fund should probably cover, with the permission 
> and funding of the new funders, all prior people prosecuted for Dark-market 
> related violations.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)  
>    Also:     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Onymous          They 
> didn't pay into the system, of course, but nevertheless they should be 
> rescued.  One big reason is that the supporters of the DMIF system won't want 
> to wait to see the enforcement aspect of that system until the next Dark 
> market is taken down. 


        Yeah that's a good point. 


> But there needs to be more research and discussion.  How many  Dark markets 
> have existed?  How many went down, and why?   

        I think all the big ones were either succesfully attacked by govt 
criminals, or the operators quit while they were ahead. Agora being the best 
example I know. 

        As to how they went down, my first guess is network surveillance. 
Here's a gem from the Tor-US-navy 'project' 

        "The longer an onion service is online, the higher the risk that its 
location is discovered. " 

        https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-onion-service.html.en
        
        

>How many are currently operating?  What are their approximate gross sales?  
>Would operators and sellers generally like the kind of system that DMIF could 
>provide? What do they think the cost/coverage should be? 


> And, while I don't know how to arrange a survey, how about a 'test-market' 
> for potential predictors, at least the subset that don't expect to survive:  
> Poll a random selection of people have have been given "medical death 
> sentences", a/k/a victims of terminal illness diagnoses.  Somebody could ask 
> them, purely as a hypothetical question, "What amount of money should be 
> offered to people like you, those with terminal illnesses, to be paid to you 
> or your relatives, if you manage to kill a person who has participated in the 
> prosecution of a Dark market case".  I think we'd all be curious as to what 
> their answers would be.


        Yeah that would be interesting. 



>                     Jim Bell
>   
> 
> 
>   

Reply via email to