[wsfii-discuss] Worldchanging article on Complementary currencies

Wed Oct 5 11:54:27 UTC 2005

On 05/10/05, Paul Sanders <paul at state51.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Jo took pleasure at being able to see what was going on more clearly.
> In my view this is not necessarily a virtue. One of our best defences
> against tyranny is our ability to avoid being seen. Freedom is rarely
> served by excessive monitoring, and the systems for monitoring are
> very easily used to monitor control itself. Purposeful inexactitude
> and ignorance is very hard, however, particularly when you are
> structuring and storing metadata.
>

This issue about the anonymity of cash is something that I've recently
been discussing on another list in the context of the expiry of the
DigiCash patent on blind signature systems which is key for anonymous
digital cash.  The question I asked was what is the utility of
anonymity for a *local* community currency?
What is the correct balance between privacy and transparency in that context?

My personal bias is towards privacy, but I've come to realise that a
certain degree of transparency in groups/communities is a good thing
but that's left me wondering where exactly to draw the line.

--
Mamading Ceesay

"Isn't a state that keeps files on innocent persons a police state?"
-- David Mery - Innocent In London http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html
 Radio Interview with David Mery
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/09/6963.php