Re: e$: Cypherpunks Sell Concepts

[die@pig.jjm.com (Dave Emery)]

> It is perfectly feasable to track all financial transactions in the
> U.S., down to the "quarter for a phone call" level, without
> eliminating all capacity to use the data or placing more than, say,
> another several percent burden on the cost of all transactions.
>
> Perry
> 

	Already, at least here in the northeast, virtually all credit
card transactions are on-line verified - it would take relatively little
additional effort to capture additional transaction details including ID
from our spiffy new national ID card and a more specific description of
what was bought.  And many supermarkets around here now do a substantial
part of their business via debit or credit cards and checks - the added
burden of converting everything over to watchable on-line electronic
transactions is probably not measured in percent per transaction but in
fractions of a percent.  The major investment in on line retail
infrastructure has already been made in most cases, what needs to be added
is just some additional software and a more legally binding ID card.

	One suspects that the cost of physically handling cash,
providing security for it and so forth is actually quite comparable to
costs of such a cashless electronic regime.  Outlawing cash is indeed
(unfortunately) quite practical. 

	If I had to guess as to what *the major* domestic target of wideband
electronic surveillance and monitoring by the TLAs is licit or illict, I
would name the credit card authorization data streams.  Probably that
and interbank wire and check clearing transfers consitute much the
largest cross section of data being watched regularly.   And I am unclear
as to whether such surveillance, with the tacit consent of the banks and
credit card companies of course, is obviously and specifically illegal. 

						Dave Emery