From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isn't this what I said?
Yes, I agreed with you with regard to the law as it is in the UK. I
corrected my mistake.
Mark
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark cited the Bank of England, not U.S. law. I don't know what British
law is in this regard.
It does appear that the law in England is not as demanding as I believed:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/legaltender.htm
The concept of legal tender is
On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 03:23 AM, Marcel Popescu wrote:
From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark cited the Bank of England, not U.S. law. I don't know what
British
law is in this regard.
It does appear that the law in England is not as demanding as I
believed:
Marcel Popescu wrote:
It does appear that the law in England is not as demanding as I believed:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/legaltender.htm
The concept of legal tender is often misunderstood. Contrary to popular
opinion, legal tender is not a means of payment that must be
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Tim May wrote:
[At least 4-5 of Hettinga's e$/digibucks/qwatloos chat lists elided
from this distributioninstead of creating so many lists, ... well,
it's obvious what the instead of ought to be.]
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 06:17 PM, Peter Fairbrother
[At least 4-5 of Hettinga's e$/digibucks/qwatloos chat lists elided
from this distributioninstead of creating so many lists, ... well,
it's obvious what the instead of ought to be.]
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 06:17 PM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
OK, suppose we've got a bank that
On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 10:31 AM, Tim May wrote:
Swiss banks could take in and dispense from accounts without any
identity credentials (the passwords and equivalents to signatures and
chop marks) because of this basic point about Bayesian probability.
Swiss banks were not
