4 ms·

Requiem for a Bright Idea (1999)

35 points by julkali 5y ago

julkali 5y ago
“As the Web grew, the average level of sophistication of users dropped. It was hard to explain the importance of privacy to them” Chaum certainly was ahead of his time, and what he said will deeply resonate with any privacy advocate. Now, more than two decades later, I believe his idea has much more potential. Firstly people are a lot more educated, about how the web works in general, how valuable privacy is and about the strength of cryptography. Secondly, it is no secret anymore that Visa et al. blatantly sell any data they have on their customers. And lastly, any entity that wants to do business online or via card transactions has to pay high fees to Card/payment providers. An open standard of electronic cash could solve these issues perfectly, undermining the existance of companies that only exist because they have a license. Maybe the time has come for Chaum's legacy.
- mojuba 5y ago
  > Firstly people are a lot more educated, about how the web works in general, how valuable privacy is and about the strength of cryptography. I don't think you can support this claim. Today, 96% of iPhone users opt out of tracking [1]. However previously I remember a similar number of users not turning off tracking when it was an opt out option in Settings (can't find the sources). This inconsistency between opt-in and opt-out behavior means one thing: users generally don't care and neither do they understand what privacy means. Because otherwise the difference between the two approaches would have been smaller. [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/07/only-4-of-ios-users-in-us-are-opting-in-to-ad-tracking-report-says https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/07/only-4-of-ios-use... > An open standard of electronic cash could solve these issues perfectly The reason this is not happening is, or not so fast anyway, is I think (1) people tend to trust government-backed currencies and (2) converting such currency to any other form is a friction point. I get my hard earn money in govt.-backend currency on my card from a bank that is tightly regulated and has govt. protection and guarantees. Then I pay from the same card. Because card network fees are not immediately visible to the consumers, they generally don't care about them, just the same way they don't care about privacy. In other words, safety and frictionless trade overweighs privacy. At least today. You are talking about a new type of digital cash, now look at some societies like Germany where about half of all transactions still takes place in cash (!). Germany is a country that's probably most privacy aware in the developed world, they don't have Google Street View for example. So instead of moving towards the unknown, privacy-aware societies seem to do the opposite, they go back to paper money. Neither do we want to have ways of spending more, I think the humanity is slowly rolling back from the consumerist mode d'emploi of the late previous century. So the picture is not as simple as we want it to be when it comes to earning, safely storing and spending our hard earned cash.
  - julkali 5y ago
    Yes, my statement might have been slightly too euphoric, however, let me provide some counter examples. > Users generally don't care and neither do they understand what privacy means. I agree with you that there is still a lot of ground to gain, however there are also signs of change, one of which Signal's strong growth in the past months (1). There were weeks where I would get a message that someone from my contacts installed the app every day. This was, of course, triggered by WhatsApp's change of TOS. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-signal-users-idUSKBN29I27U https://www.reuters.com/article/us-signal-users-idUSKBN29I27... I believe that IF there is a privacy-enhancing alternative that is comparably comfortable to use, people do migrate. This would also agree with your claim that users take whatever's default. Your remarks about trust and interoperability are very valid in my view also. To solve both of this, it would, I believe, need a system that is government backed, open standard and free of charge. The latter might of course be a little optimistic, however not impossible; especially European countries provide/host many administrative services for free, why not subsidize such a system as well. I am thinking of a coin-based system where coins are created/distributed by each bank separately and can be either transferred seemlessly to another owner or exchanged at that bank for a regular currency. In terms of convenience, this could be as easy as scanning a QR code or a similar mobile implementation and should be no obstacle. > Look at some societies like Germany where about half of all transactions still takes place in cash. This is true, however especially due to the pandemic, there was a considerable shift towards cashless (2). In Munich area, for example, most of time I see people pay, they use debit or credit cards, especially young people. [2] https://www.inquirer.com/business/retail/coronavirus-surge-cashless-mobile-payments-20200706.html https://www.inquirer.com/business/retail/coronavirus-surge-c... And lastly, the connection to the amount of the expense is not clear to me, how does the amount have anything to do with the means in this particular case? I agree with you, that we might not be there yet, also because viable protocols are missing, but I still stand by my belief that the shift is possible and by magnitudes more likely than back in 1999.
    - mojuba 5y ago
      So if I understand you correctly, digital cash is just a way of escaping the big two, Visa and MasterCard and their fees? Because otherwise, what'd be the essential difference between any govt.-backed digital money and the official one? What would be the exchange rate? Say 1-to-1 with Euro, or with the dollar? Then what's the point of having it in the first place?
Animats 5y ago
This, of course, is the technology underlying Bitcoin.
- captaincrowbar 5y ago
  No, it isn't. Nobody was talking about blockchains that far back. What this is about is the early pioneers of the commercial digital payment market that was eventually dominated by the likes of Paypal and Stripe.
  - xyzzy123 5y ago
    There is a distinct cypherpunk lineage that we can trace through Chaum and down to Satoshi and beyond. Ref eg: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.06130.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.06130.pdf Chaum didn't invent p2p blockchains but his systems did have ledgers and stuff like anonymous payments between nyms. Yes, the goal of DigiCash was that it would have occupied a similar place to Paypal (the goal of most early e-cash systems!) but the underlying technology was very different and a lot closer to what bitcoin became.
SyzygistSix 5y ago
"U.S. consumers are deeply wedded to credit cards," says CyberCash's Melton. In the US we are forced into using credit cards in order to participate in society. People get credit checks to even rent an apartment now. And not being in debt is not good enough criteria to have "good credit". It's an example of rent-seeking behavior that has been grafted onto our economic culture while not providing any kind of benefit.
- cheschire 5y ago
  I've had a few american friends scoff at the chinese social score system, and then turn humbly quiet when I point out america has been under a similar system for years already. In true american spirit though, it's privatized.
  - truth_ 5y ago
    Apples and oranges. Being forced to be in debt which you can manage if you are mature enough is nowehere comparable to having to agree to and behave in the line the autocratic rulers want. Having good credit and paying bills in time is only a small part the Chinese social score system. These two are, in no way, meaningfully comparable.
    - becquerel 5y ago
      Debt is a reality of modern life, not something you can opt-out of by reading the right self-help books. Control is bad, whether it's direct control by state actors or indirect societal control by credit agencies.
      - truth_ 5y ago
        Your comment is so convoluted. Not really related to what is said. I am just talking about paying your credit card bills on time. Many people I know do this successfully without fail. I am not writing a thesis on bigger implications of debt.
      - perilunar 5y ago

35 points by julkali 5y ago

“As the Web grew, the average level of sophistication of users dropped. It was hard to explain the importance of privacy to them” Chaum certainly was ahead of his time, and what he said will deeply resonate with any privacy advocate. Now, more than two decades later, I believe his idea has much more potential. Firstly people are a lot more educated, about how the web works in general, how valuable privacy is and about the strength of cryptography. Secondly, it is no secret anymore that Visa et al. blatantly sell any data they have on their customers. And lastly, any entity that wants to do business online or via card transactions has to pay high fees to Card/payment providers. An open standard of electronic cash could solve these issues perfectly, undermining the existance of companies that only exist because they have a license. Maybe the time has come for Chaum's legacy.

mojuba 5y ago
> Firstly people are a lot more educated, about how the web works in general, how valuable privacy is and about the strength of cryptography. I don't think you can support this claim. Today, 96% of iPhone users opt out of tracking [1]. However previously I remember a similar number of users not turning off tracking when it was an opt out option in Settings (can't find the sources). This inconsistency between opt-in and opt-out behavior means one thing: users generally don't care and neither do they understand what privacy means. Because otherwise the difference between the two approaches would have been smaller. [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/07/only-4-of-ios-users-in-us-are-opting-in-to-ad-tracking-report-says https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/07/only-4-of-ios-use... > An open standard of electronic cash could solve these issues perfectly The reason this is not happening is, or not so fast anyway, is I think (1) people tend to trust government-backed currencies and (2) converting such currency to any other form is a friction point. I get my hard earn money in govt.-backend currency on my card from a bank that is tightly regulated and has govt. protection and guarantees. Then I pay from the same card. Because card network fees are not immediately visible to the consumers, they generally don't care about them, just the same way they don't care about privacy. In other words, safety and frictionless trade overweighs privacy. At least today. You are talking about a new type of digital cash, now look at some societies like Germany where about half of all transactions still takes place in cash (!). Germany is a country that's probably most privacy aware in the developed world, they don't have Google Street View for example. So instead of moving towards the unknown, privacy-aware societies seem to do the opposite, they go back to paper money. Neither do we want to have ways of spending more, I think the humanity is slowly rolling back from the consumerist mode d'emploi of the late previous century. So the picture is not as simple as we want it to be when it comes to earning, safely storing and spending our hard earned cash.
- julkali 5y ago
  Yes, my statement might have been slightly too euphoric, however, let me provide some counter examples. > Users generally don't care and neither do they understand what privacy means. I agree with you that there is still a lot of ground to gain, however there are also signs of change, one of which Signal's strong growth in the past months (1). There were weeks where I would get a message that someone from my contacts installed the app every day. This was, of course, triggered by WhatsApp's change of TOS. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-signal-users-idUSKBN29I27U https://www.reuters.com/article/us-signal-users-idUSKBN29I27... I believe that IF there is a privacy-enhancing alternative that is comparably comfortable to use, people do migrate. This would also agree with your claim that users take whatever's default. Your remarks about trust and interoperability are very valid in my view also. To solve both of this, it would, I believe, need a system that is government backed, open standard and free of charge. The latter might of course be a little optimistic, however not impossible; especially European countries provide/host many administrative services for free, why not subsidize such a system as well. I am thinking of a coin-based system where coins are created/distributed by each bank separately and can be either transferred seemlessly to another owner or exchanged at that bank for a regular currency. In terms of convenience, this could be as easy as scanning a QR code or a similar mobile implementation and should be no obstacle. > Look at some societies like Germany where about half of all transactions still takes place in cash. This is true, however especially due to the pandemic, there was a considerable shift towards cashless (2). In Munich area, for example, most of time I see people pay, they use debit or credit cards, especially young people. [2] https://www.inquirer.com/business/retail/coronavirus-surge-cashless-mobile-payments-20200706.html https://www.inquirer.com/business/retail/coronavirus-surge-c... And lastly, the connection to the amount of the expense is not clear to me, how does the amount have anything to do with the means in this particular case? I agree with you, that we might not be there yet, also because viable protocols are missing, but I still stand by my belief that the shift is possible and by magnitudes more likely than back in 1999.
  - mojuba 5y ago
    So if I understand you correctly, digital cash is just a way of escaping the big two, Visa and MasterCard and their fees? Because otherwise, what'd be the essential difference between any govt.-backed digital money and the official one? What would be the exchange rate? Say 1-to-1 with Euro, or with the dollar? Then what's the point of having it in the first place?

Animats 5y ago

This, of course, is the technology underlying Bitcoin.

captaincrowbar 5y ago
No, it isn't. Nobody was talking about blockchains that far back. What this is about is the early pioneers of the commercial digital payment market that was eventually dominated by the likes of Paypal and Stripe.
- xyzzy123 5y ago
  There is a distinct cypherpunk lineage that we can trace through Chaum and down to Satoshi and beyond. Ref eg: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.06130.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.06130.pdf Chaum didn't invent p2p blockchains but his systems did have ledgers and stuff like anonymous payments between nyms. Yes, the goal of DigiCash was that it would have occupied a similar place to Paypal (the goal of most early e-cash systems!) but the underlying technology was very different and a lot closer to what bitcoin became.

SyzygistSix 5y ago

"U.S. consumers are deeply wedded to credit cards," says CyberCash's Melton. In the US we are forced into using credit cards in order to participate in society. People get credit checks to even rent an apartment now. And not being in debt is not good enough criteria to have "good credit". It's an example of rent-seeking behavior that has been grafted onto our economic culture while not providing any kind of benefit.

cheschire 5y ago
I've had a few american friends scoff at the chinese social score system, and then turn humbly quiet when I point out america has been under a similar system for years already. In true american spirit though, it's privatized.
- truth_ 5y ago
  Apples and oranges. Being forced to be in debt which you can manage if you are mature enough is nowehere comparable to having to agree to and behave in the line the autocratic rulers want. Having good credit and paying bills in time is only a small part the Chinese social score system. These two are, in no way, meaningfully comparable.
  - becquerel 5y ago
    Debt is a reality of modern life, not something you can opt-out of by reading the right self-help books. Control is bad, whether it's direct control by state actors or indirect societal control by credit agencies.
    - truth_ 5y ago
      Your comment is so convoluted. Not really related to what is said. I am just talking about paying your credit card bills on time. Many people I know do this successfully without fail. I am not writing a thesis on bigger implications of debt.
    - perilunar 5y ago