Re: Protocols for Insurance to Maintain Privacy

[Tim May <tcmay@got.net>]

At 5:03 PM -0700 11/5/97, Adam Back wrote:
>John Kelsey <kelsey@plnet.net> writes:
>> Suppose there is some genetic disease that kills its victims on
>> their 31st birthday, unless they get a $1,000,000 treatment first.
>> Before I have taken the test for this disease, I have to accept a
>> certain risk--if I find out I have the disease, I have to raise a
>> million dollars in the next few months.  After I have taken the test
>> and gotten back the results, there's no more risk involved (assuming
>> the test is perfect)--I either have the disease or I don't.

I want to say one more thing about the example John Kelsey cites here.

That million dollar disease example is not too compelling to me. For
starters, there are literally hundreds of millions of persons on the planet
who are expected to die from various diseases or nutritional deficiencies
for lack of, not a million dollar treatment, not a $100,000 treatment, not
even a $1000 treatment...

No, there are billions who will die early (in childhood, early youth, etc.)
for want of treatments or supplements costing a few hundred dollars.

Not that I support forcibly extorting money from those who have it to give
to these wretches.

Which means I can honestly tell the "million dollar disease" guy: "I hope
you saved up a million dollars."

>> Before the test, though, insurance might be useful--I could
>> essentially place a bet with someone that I had the disease--I pay
>> $1, and get a million dollars back if my test comes back
>> positive--just enough to pay for my treatment.
>
>The insurance company would have no financial incentive to take on
>such risks -- I reckon they'd sooner let the wanna-be customer die.
>Nasty, but it's reality.

And underwriters do this all the time. That is, they fine-tune their
estimates of risks and adjust premiums accordingly.

If Joe Patient makes a bet on this million dollar disease, but won't let me
see any test reports, or won't let me test him independently, I as an
undewriter am going to make the assumption he knows something I don't know.
And his premium is going to go way, way up.

--Tim May


The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^2,976,221   | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."