RE: Why does the state still stand:

From: 	Hal [on the idea of companies operating fully anonymously]

It might be interesting to make a list of all the problems people can
think of why this idea won't work, paired with proposed solutions and
workarounds - sort of a mini FAQ for this important (some might say
ultimate) cypherpunk model.
.....................................................................

I think this is a much needed discussion  - in particular as it comes at a time when Uni is is "somewhat disconcerted" at the defeatist attitude of some cypherpunks and since TCMay is getting ready to read us the Cypherpunks Bill of Rights regarding the subsidizatoin of other's people's cyber existence (heh). 

3 problems which immediately come to mind:

.  What if someone, hired on one occasion but fired at another, decides in anger to "turn coat" and report everyone to the IRS (or other fine government agency)?

.  What if a company does not pay as expected - other than adopting Assassination Politics, what method could an employee use towards getting their expected remuneration for work done?

.  Wouldn't everyone need to have two jobs (or source of regularly accepted cash), in order to be able to pay for services where suppliers do not accept virtual cash transactions? (TCM has mentioned before about the need to pay for some things in tiny quantities - like quarters for a phone call, etc.)


     ..
Blanc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Tue, 14 May 1996, blanc wrote:

> .  What if someone, hired on one occasion but fired at another, decides in
> anger to "turn coat" and report everyone to the IRS (or other fine government
> agency)?

In this scheme, all employees are pseudonymous so a disgruntled worker would
have nothing to report.

> 
> .  What if a company does not pay as expected - other than adopting
> Assassination Politics, what method could an employee use towards getting
> their expected remuneration for work done?

A company could not afford to have such a loss of reputation.  Nobody is going
to work for a company that doesn't pay its employees.

> 
> .  Wouldn't everyone need to have two jobs (or source of regularly
> accepted cash), in order to be able to pay for services where suppliers do
> not accept virtual cash transactions? (TCM has mentioned before about the
> need to pay for some things in tiny quantities - like quarters for a phone
> call, etc.)

I think that this could be solved by having services which could exchange
ecash for real cash and real cash to ecash.  Also, such a system could be
used for fully anonymous ecash -- sort of like a remailer for virtual money.

- -- Mark

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
markm@voicenet.com              | finger -l for PGP key 0xe3bf2169
http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ | d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348
((2b) || !(2b))                 | Old key now used only for signatures
"The concept of normalcy is just a conspiracy of the majority" -me


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMZpiUrZc+sv5siulAQEiYwP9HnvfuWNRPjsGgr1oron+OBOJS8R0CUnj
aopJ22OjkE4RdWPKjb21heLkuAYY1pFoYG+k571cGvxYCLPqAKX+rx++BWvdkmGr
q0qSEmpDtkkR8qdaWm3XWT83iQrxig/HzVkzQ2Bvgj1a6f/r83y1rhp3aCAcD89p
nifimeB7jTc=
=uUOR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Tue, 14 May 1996, blanc wrote:

> From: 	Hal [on the idea of companies operating fully anonymously]
> 
> It might be interesting to make a list of all the problems people can
> think of why this idea won't work, paired with proposed solutions and
> workarounds - sort of a mini FAQ for this important (some might say
> ultimate) cypherpunk model.
> .....................................................................
> 
> I think this is a much needed discussion  - in particular as it comes at a time when Uni is is "somewhat disconcerted" at the defeatist attitude of some cypherpunks and since TCMay is getting ready to read us the Cypherpunks Bill of Rights regarding the subsidizatoin of other's people's cyber existence (heh). 
> 
> 3 problems which immediately come to mind:
> 
> .  What if someone, hired on one occasion but fired at another, decides
in anger to "turn coat" and report everyone to the IRS (or other fine
government agency)?

The entire organization would clearly have to be double blinded.  If this
can be done for mailing lists (which I believe it can) it can be done for
corporations too.  The real trick is getting the costs of anonymous (and I
mean secure anonymous) communications low enough.

> 
> .  What if a company does not pay as expected - other than adopting
> Assassination Politics, what method could an employee use towards
> getting their expected remuneration for work done?

If payment is made weekly, it should be made in advance to an escrow agent
who would issue a certificate that the payment for employee r2dd54 has
been received.  The payment would then not be released to anyone without
the consent of the corporation and the employee.

Obviously the escrow agent would have to be trusted.

This prevents an anonymous employee from running off with money without
working and prevents an anonymous corporation from screwing the employee.

Even if a payment gets hung up in a dispute, it's only for a week.

You could break the payments into monthly, or bi yearly or however you
like.

> .  Wouldn't everyone need to have two jobs (or source of regularly
> accepted cash), in order to be able to pay for services where suppliers
> do not accept virtual cash transactions? (TCM has mentioned before about
> the need to pay for some things in tiny quantities - like quarters for a
> phone call, etc.)

This is what unemployment is for.  No reported income = no job = get
portions of your previously paid tax back before you die.

In addition, why not exchange virutal cash for spending money offshore and
have it forwarded to you?

It's not hard to hide the kind of small pure cash transactions that day to
day living requires (Food, telephone, etc).  The only problem is the large
purchases which require reportable type transactions.

For these a company running at a constant net operating loss could be
formed to purchase cars for resale (funny how no one ever buys them) and
manage property (which no one seems to ever lease).

>      ..
> Blanc

---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> What if someone, hired on one occasion but fired at another, decides in
> anger to "turn coat" and report everyone to the IRS (or other fine
> government agency)? 

They can't, if the company doesn't use True Names.

> What if a company does not pay as expected - other than adopting
> Assassination Politics, what method could an employee use towards getting
> their expected remuneration for work done? 

This is a serious problem... An employee could, of course, state his/her
case to Usenet and other places and bring down the reputation of the
company. Problem is, would people believe him/her? And if people would
believe, what's to stop someone from deciding to "turn coat" like you said
above, except instead of reporting to the IRS, they spread lies to the
world? Assasination Politics won't work if you can't locate the physical
person, but reputation assassination would probably be a fairly simple
matter. 

Another problem with reputations is that people are stuck until they get a
good one. A bad rep can always start over. In fact, a person/company can
look perfectly nice, but use a different identity for dirty work.
Naturally, you'd only trust dealings that involve a "nice" identity.
Problem is, young people who are just starting out have a no-reputation
identity, and would be treated the same as the no-reputation identities
that are used for screwing people over. 

Reputations could be very hard to create, and very easy to destroy.
Well-known good reputations would be powerful and fairly hard to destroy,
so it's possible that the big reputations might try to crush little
reputations in an effort to gain some sort of reputation monopoly. Maybe. 

> Wouldn't everyone need to have two jobs (or source of regularly accepted
> cash), in order to be able to pay for services where suppliers do not
> accept virtual cash transactions? (TCM has mentioned before about the need
> to pay for some things in tiny quantities - like quarters for a phone
> call, etc.)

This is not a problem. I believe some of the ecash banks are already
exchanging ecash for physical cash. It's a needed service, so there will
always be people willing to do it. 


I do not advocate tax evasion or any other illegal activity. I'm just
looking through a hazy crytal ball to see one possible future. 


=====================================================================
| Steve Reid - SysAdmin & Pres, EDM Web (http://www.edmweb.com/)    |
| Email: steve@edmweb.com   Home Page: http://www.edmweb.com/steve/ |
| PGP (2048/9F317269) Fingerprint: 11C89D1CD67287E68C09EC52443F8830 |
|          -- Disclaimer: JMHO, YMMV, TANSTAAFL, IANAL. --          |
===================================================================:)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMZo5k9tVWdufMXJpAQEkhggApuaYGCbl0qcYhnlN/KshtT4HKhHyBh5J
jK4gO9bsJ0Gwl0WYYhGZ/Vuc1QVl9+9YzHMEDwR1S4ldY7ZnbqUIV4tJ3k0SNbmZ
tKZE6yC+x4RgTjc/Qu4yy0dEsfaeNIY+xKQTgFNh4zY4ACuhYRv/KL5e3JWG1EtM
BwglvOUBVWcHBwB3F0XXwzkRTF7ZaZC4XEJBUWOBAFRrC+u9ELTTL7FcJcLFxBoV
QqgWbEBeS1Ej00l5H6Tk9GPGoWAENFA4fXHQeaOBlbo7EmvSCaM5sY1ds75PtMHz
5Wo/yh2P7M7eQ3Y2MhuU/5lmJH3bKk9/PU6bsvBCP3CTGDoimfHOUA==
=P86h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----