[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Digital Coin Claim
Clarification 1) unix munched out on some text. Para 2: "such a history is necessary
only to clarify with currency and bearer instruments disputes over
ownership....arg try again now
"to clarify disputes over ownership, liens, and defects - things which are
simply not problems with bearer instruments"
Clarification 2) Digicoins may differ from ordinary currency in being revocable,
but this is not necessary. That is, X loses his digicoin. Y finds it and uses it.
Just like money. OR: X loses his digicoin. Y finds it but cannot use it b/c Y
does not know the PIN. OR: X loses his digicoin. Y could use the digicoin, but
X calls the issuing bank and they cancel the digicoin number.
In the last scenario, the one most compatible with the 'chain of title'
or verification-type approach, there is clearly a major privacy problem.
At least this is the way I see it...