[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Jump Start ecash With IPhone
Proposal: Augment computer-to-computer Internet phone with local
telephone-to-Internet-phone gateways to create a new
telephone-to-telephone long distance network via the Internet.
Result 1: No computer is needed for cheap long distance or
international voice phone calls.
Result 2: ecash gets its "Killer Ap", a service that (a) people
want to buy and (b) requires micropayments for economic
feasibility. (Details below.)
Result 3: Creates a large, decentralized market that is difficult
for anyone to regulate and that provides many opportunities
to make money.
Obvious
Nonresult: Achieving privacy in long distance or international voice
requires further development. Hardware and software
beyond that in an ordinary telephone is needed at each end.
Who Can Do It:
ISPs (Internet Service Providers) are in the best position to
operate nodes of this decentralized network. They have the
Internet connection, the phone banks, the technical expertise,
and some business experience.
Telephone <---> ISP <---------> ISP <---> Telephone
Scenario (Result 1):
Granny Smith in Paducah wants to chat with her grandson Adam Smith,
who is studying economics in Hong Kong. From her ordinary touch-tone
phone she makes a local _voice_ call to Cheap Speech, Inc. and at
the prompt enters the phone number for Adam. Cheap Speech finds that
TalkToMe Ltd is a network node in Hong Kong within a local phone call
of Adam and, through the Internet, establishes a connection. Then it
patches in the voice call from Granny as TalkToMe dials out and
reaches Adam.
Granny Smith <--> Cheap Speech <-----> TalkToMe <--> Adam Smith
Payments (Result 2):
More than half the cost of running a traditional long distance voice
business is for handling the billing. The cost of the technology to
provide the service is thus less than the cost of the billing!
Cheap Speech and TalkToMe cannot provide cheap voice service,
as in the example above, unless they use a much more efficient payment
system. That is why the low transaction cost of ecash is so important
and that is why this message is being sent to cypherpunks rather than a
telecom list or news group.
So who uses the ecash? Surely Granny and Adam Smith can't shove it
through ordinary telephones. They just want to get ordinary voice
connections with ordinary telephones as they have for many years,
only cheaper.
Here is how I think ecash fits in:
Granny Smith --> Cheap Speech
Granny pays Cheap Speech through ordinary means, probably
by monthly credit card charge, which is common for ISPs.
The overhead for this probably is only around 5% (plus staff
for account setup and support) because the ISP already is
set up for that kind of payment system and Granny Smith is
a local person providing repeat business, not a bad apple
on a spending spree with a stolen credit card number.
Cheap Speech --> TalkToMe
Cheap Speech and TalkToMe do not have any previous business
arrangement with each other and probably never have done business
with each other before. They also are on opposite sides of the
world. But Cheap Speech consults a Rating Service that says
TalkToMe is reliable, so Cheap Speech sends a small amount of
ecash to TalkToMe to open a connection and dial out to Adam.
Since ecash clears instantly, TalkToMe does not need to know
anything about Cheap Speech. No international billing network
is needed. Little overhead is incurred.
TalkToMe --> Adam Smith
TalkToMe provides this service in exchange for the ecash from
Cheap Speech.
The main problem I see with this scheme is that Cheap Speech may
have a cash flow problem. Payment to TalkToMe must be made immediately
whereas payment from Granny Smith may take a couple of months to
arrive. If, however, the volume of incoming calls (ecash coming in)
matches the volume of outgoing calls (ecash going out), then the cash
flow will balance out. Also, Cheap Speech could offer Granny a discount
for prepayment.
Regulation and Profit Opportunities (Result 3):
Big, centralized organizations are big targets for lawsuits and
regulation. They are the "deep pockets" lawyers love to pick.
They are the leverage points for power-hungry politicians.
But the Internet was designed to survive nuclear war. It was
designed to route around outages, no matter their cause.
A decentralized, Internet-based, international network of small,
independent voice service providers could enjoy similar advantages.
Many companies are creating _computer-to-computer_ Internet phone
software. See the NetWatch Top Ten - Voice / Video On The Net at URL:
http://www.pulver.com/netwatch/topten/tt24.htm
We can depend on that technology to improve. I do not know of any
companies who also are providing interfaces to ordinary telephones
and designing a decentralized network with an ecash-powered payment
system. That is our advantage.
But the network described above has many limitations. These are
opportunities to make money by selling your solutions to customers.
Examples:
It needs a directory and rating service for voice providers such as
Cheap Speech and TalkToMe. (Perhaps Raph Levien will expand
his rating services to a new domain?)
The network will not be useful until it has many nodes.
That is partly why this proposal is being sent to a large audience.
Cypherpunks who cut their teeth building a remailer network perhaps
can build a voice network, too? Think of it as a challenge.
People who travel a lot will want cheap long distance telephone service
while on the road. How do they arrange that if their only contract
is with a service provider near their home? We need a more
flexible payment protocol than the one described above.
Enhanced services - fax, teleconferencing, time-delay and retry,
phone mail, and collect calls.
Multiple brands of ecash will require conversion services. Currently
Mark Twain Bank's offering looks best, but when ecash succeeds,
expect many more. Eventually, the network may work best with
ecash denominated in currencies other than government-sponsored
fiat currencies.
Conclusion:
If this idea is so good, then why am I telling you about it?
(A) I cannot do it all myself.
(B) Feedback on the idea from knowledgeable people is valuable.
(C) If it succeeds, it will create a market with opportunity for
plenty of people to make money, including me.
(D) We have a limited window of opportunity to get this done. My guess
is that we have roughly one year before other people embed their
solutions into the Internet and financial system so deeply that
this network will be locked out from commercial success. According
to the theory of increasing returns, whoever gets to market first
usually gets the market.
(E) Even though the decentralized structure should help reduce exposure
of the network-as-a-whole to harmful lawsuits and regulations,
individual local providers may face sanctions from regulators of
the FCC, state PUCs, national Telekom monopolies, etc. once they
realize what's happening. (Operators of cypherpunk remailers endure
similar risks.) The faster the system can be developed and deployed,
with a large number of satisfied customers, the more widespread
support it will have, the harder it will be to stamp out, and the
safer life will be for everyone involved. It would be nice to be
able to say "The Genie is out of the bottle."
CW