[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ecash speed
> "Perry E. Metzger" <[email protected]> writes:
> >Hal writes:
> >> The point is that if the anonymity afforded by ecash is too costly in
> >> terms of time, then we may end up stuck with a non-anonymous system
> >> simply because that is the only one efficient enough to work. It would
> >> be good to find out if that is a serious problem.
> >I suspect that as CPU speed exponentiates this will become less and
> >less of a problem. It doesn't especially worry me.
> Consider, though, what happens in the current ecash system if it were
> used to charge a penny per page.
[Describes lots of steps...]
I'm really not that convinced that this is a problem in either
direction. With users everywhere on the net connected via
multi-megabit per second links, high speed CPUs, etc, a few extra TCP
connections and RSA operations really might not be noticed in a half
> This all has to happen whenever you click on a link in your browser.
> Even with fast CPU's I think the extra step of connecting to the bank,
> having it check against all coins, and getting approval will be
> considerable for each link traversal.
Again, I'm not convinced either way. I believe we have to wait and see
how fast things really are in practice.