Re: Fwd: Financial Cryptography Update: The Digital Silk Road (DSR)

David,

I am available for any dialog, on these topics, as long as it is
simple and direct.   I discard your inquiry about "charm", for example.

I think it would be a mistake to get into the fine grained
questions until we identify whether we agree about the
bigger questions (or assumptions? )

1. you seem to discard my argument that capacity on
a mesh is a scarce resource and should be viewed the
same as other economic resources.   Read your comment
below.  That's not much of a rebuttal.  I see nothing to make
me change my mind.  You don't even have to demonstrate that
capacity is inexhaustible. You only need to establish that
a mesh can achieve a net benefit exceeding its cost, to
individuals buying the mesh nodes, within your preferred
ideas about capacity management.

2. at bottom you seem to reject my argument that wherever
there is a valuable resource in a commons, it will be exploited
by abusers if there is neither governance rules or a price
charged to the abuser.   I appreciate your point about SPAM
but I am not going to get into an argument over what is a
mere example.  There have been 100s of books and treatises
about the economics of commons.  Please tell me why
network capacity on an unregulated urban mesh network
would behave any different from other commons.  I don't
have time for mickey mouse stuff.

Todd

At 01:15 AM 3/22/2004, David Young wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 12:13:18PM -0800, Todd Boyle wrote:
> > Ian said,
> >
> > > DSR is a historical pre-commercial (circa 1994)
> > > http://www.agorics.com/Library/dsr.html shared accounting
> > > architecture that was proposed to compensate router owners for
> > > passing the packets of other entities.
> >
> > Good reminder!
>
>The conclusion of that paper:
>
>     Much of the charm of the Internet is the informality of access. One
>     can learn of a program through netnews, fetch it via FTP and run
>     the program in the span of an hour with no bureaucrats, clerks or
>     lawyers involved. This simplicity is as much a matter of Internet
>     culture as charter. But what has more charm and informality than a
>     flea-market where cash and anonymity prevail?
>
>Are "charm and informality" all that cash-based packet-forwarding has
>to offer?
>
> > However, capacity is not infinite and the critical element
> > missing from a large-scale urban mesh is only the lack of
> > social agreement how to measure or charge each other
> > for transit across our hub.
>
>All this time I thought that the shortcomings and expense of existing
>technology prevented us from fostering packet-forwarding jealousy and
>avarice by building a large-scale urban mesh. In fact, it is the lack
>of NET-MONEY that is holding us back.
>
> > SPAM is a great example of
> > when happens when no effort is made to charge for use of
> > a resource.  SPAMMERS send 1 million ads for viagra,
> > or 1 billion, what's the difference?
>
>This sounds to me like, "Either we charge real money for e-mail to be
>delivered, or else 1 billion Viagra ads will be sent."  You do not think
>that might be a false dilemma?
>
>Dave
>
>--
>David Young             OJC Technologies
>[email protected]      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933
>
>_______________________________________________
>CU-Wireless mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cu-wireless
>Project Page: http://cuwireless.ucimc.org

_______________________________________________
CU-Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cu-wireless
Project Page: http://cuwireless.ucimc.org