Chaum Fathers Bastard Child To RubberHose ... PrivaTegrity cMix

[alex@testcore.net (Alex Stahl)]

Sounds like we're in agreement then that crypto systems with political solutions aren't 
actually crypto solutions at all then?

Anyone else (dis)agree?

On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:56:06 AM PST juan wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:30:49 -0800
> 
> Alex Stahl <alex@testcore.net> wrote:
> > Point is the technology is neutral/agnostic to its location and
> > operator - and that a key part of the solution is in fact political.
> 
> 	Oh yes, I do see that. And it's based on the
> 	'division-of-power' and 'checks-and-balances' doctrine, which I
> 	don't find especially convincing or effective.
> 
> > Hell, I'm still wondering who would use such a system in the first
> > place without the imposition of regulation?
> 
> 	Well, the leaders of the liberal democracies might be able to
> 	create a few laws and regulations to adopt chaum's system and
> 	save the children from digital terrorism. Or something.
> 
> > On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 3:31:49 AM PST juan wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 22:15:36 -0800
> > > 
> > > Alex Stahl <alex@testcore.net> wrote:
> > > > Second, he implied that, with the use of these policies, if a
> > > > message were to traverse a network with nodes operated by the US,
> > > > Canada, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Iran, Russia, China and Japan,
> > > 	
> > > 	I think the actual network would be more like washington,
> > > 	boston, new york, los angeles, london, panama, puerto rico,
> > > 	marshal islands and maybe brussels.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20160112/52bfc07c/attachment.html>