On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 08:40:33AM -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
time for such pipe dreams. Now that many are un- or under-employed there
still doesn't seem to be any activity by those active on this list in this
critical infrastructure area. All the recent work that is being done
(e.g.,
Tim May wrote:
Some lurker unwilling to comment on the public list sent me this. I
didn't notice it wasn't intended for the list until I had already
written a reply and was preparing to send it. So I have altered the
name.
'Twas meant for the list, I just hit reply instead of reply all
At 2:15 PM +0100 7/26/03, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
Personally I prefer to hit reply, ie with a Reply-To: header set to the
list (confusing, eg!). That way, if I want to reply to the list (which is my
default preference) then the sender of the mail I'm replying to doesn't get
two copies. But then I
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 07:12 PM, Steve Furlong wrote:
On Thursday 24 July 2003 15:50, Tim May wrote:
In fact, digicash strongly suggests David Chaum's Digicash,
That assumes the reader or listener has heard of Digicash, or of Chaum.
Not an assumption I'd be comfortable making.
Agreed,
Oh, like Uday and Qusay, you can't kill this immortal fucker,
nobody got the guts to plow a TOW in it. Instead, thousands of
gutless have hari-kiried by exiting the battle for well.com
nutlick where the dead live in perfect, silent synchrony, so that
is a no-brain, no-work option. Sit still,
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, John Young wrote:
The old days, don't believe them, cypherpunks was and is toxic
to serious makeovers and shutdowns and lock-outs, and, never
forget that PLONKS are cries of shut the fuck up and listen to me.
Pluck the PLONKS, if you don't get them you aint earning your
On Friday 25 July 2003 11:40, Steve Schear wrote:
... Now that many are un-
or under-employed there still doesn't seem to be any activity by
those active on this list in this critical infrastructure area.
Speaking only for myself, I'm making a lot less than I was a couple of
years ago. In
Some lurker unwilling to comment on the public list sent me this. I
didn't notice it wasn't intended for the list until I had already
written a reply and was preparing to send it. So I have altered the
name.
--Tim
On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 01:07 PM, SOMEONE wrote:
Tim May wrote:
On
On Friday, July 25, 2003, at 02:36 PM, Steve Furlong wrote:
On Friday 25 July 2003 11:40, Steve Schear wrote:
... Now that many are un-
or under-employed there still doesn't seem to be any activity by
those active on this list in this critical infrastructure area.
Speaking only for myself, I'm
On Friday 25 July 2003 11:40, Steve Schear wrote:
... Now that many are un-
or under-employed there still doesn't seem to be any activity by
those active on this list in this critical infrastructure area.
In some sense, we have enough code. Code exists that can be deployed. It
may have to go
One point being overlooked here is digital versus physical anonymity.
The funky ATM (what, does it smell or something?) will allow you to
(among other things) stick in some cash and let someone else withdraw it
using a password which you have sent him out of band (according to the
patent - which
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 11:16 AM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
On 2003-07-23, Sunder uttered:
If you want to do electronic payments that are non-anonymous you can
simply use a credit card or debit card (or something like paypal,
egold),
or for larger quanitities you can do wire transfers - so
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 03:17 PM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
On 2003-07-24, Tim May uttered:
HOWEVER, our interest is in the untraceable/anonymous.
Duh!
You were gibbering about how digicash includes PayPal, ATMs, Visa,
and other forms of transfers which are only digital in that computers
On Thursday 24 July 2003 15:50, Tim May wrote:
In fact, digicash strongly suggests David Chaum's Digicash,
That assumes the reader or listener has heard of Digicash, or of Chaum.
Not an assumption I'd be comfortable making.
I choose not to call untraceable/anonymous digital cash by any of
: Re: A 'Funky A.T.M.' Lets You Pay for Purchases Made Online
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 13:39:41 -0500
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:25:59AM -0400, Sunder wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Steve Furlong wrote:
(I won't be able to observe directly,
as I was fired from that company because I'm an incompetent
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:25:59AM -0400, Sunder wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Steve Furlong wrote:
(I won't be able to observe directly,
as I was fired from that company because I'm an incompetent slacker
(boss's view) or because the boss was a jack-booted jackass (my view).)
Shit
I wonder if some sort of infrared LED laden bandana be made for the
benefit of the cameras. :) Maybe something like those scrolling
blackboard things that say stuff...
It could say things like I'm ANONYMOUS, Neener neener, nya, nya, nya
I wonder what the guards would do then?
If the digicash isn't anonymous, it's worthless.
I'd argue to the contrary. First, most people have nothing to hide.
The folks will want digicash for reasons other than anonymity, as argued
You are misusing the term cash. What you are describing are essentially
internet debit cards. While it
On Monday 21 July 2003 01:12, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
http://nytimes.com/2003/07/21/technology/21PATE.html?pagewanted=prin
tposition=
A 'Funky A.T.M.' Lets You Pay for Purchases Made Online
I worked on a commercial digital money system a few years ago. One of
their business models was almost
http://nytimes.com/2003/07/21/technology/21PATE.html?pagewanted=printposition=
The New York Times
July 21, 2003
A 'Funky A.T.M.' Lets You Pay for Purchases Made Online
By TERESA RIORDAN
the 1997 science-fiction movie The Velocity Trap, the interstellar banking system is
so decimated
20 matches
Mail list logo
