commit 7c2c6bde528f30f29598120482a133afe62bd974
parent d715f2955eddb929947e9694e704b97b215ef90c
Author: Martin Schanzenbach <schanzen@gnunet.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 00:10:39 +0100
no plug before principles
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/2022-privacy/privacy.tex b/2022-privacy/privacy.tex
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ monitoring would be a mandatory component of the system, which is
%FIXME dangerous for the authors? What exactly is dangerous?
% Maybe just say it is false? An incorrect conclusion?
demonstrably false: There are many digital currencies that do not allow such
-surveillance, such as Monero~\cite{monero} or Taler~\cite{dold2019}. Thus, it
+surveillance~\cite{monero,dold2019}. Thus, it
is dangerous for the authors of the French report take a possible design choice
of an account-based system as fact, for example when they write that ``the
centralization and data tracking of central bank digital currency projects
@@ -261,9 +261,13 @@ With electronic tokens it is possible to implement payment systems that are
not CBDCs. For example, a Swiss group around Claudio
Zanetti~\footnote{\url{https://www.zanetti.ch/}} is considering launching an
electronic payment system based on gold. Direct payments with physical gold
-are problematic, as giving change (the exact problem GNU Taler~\cite{dold2019}
-solves for Chaum's DigiCash~\cite{chaum1988untraceable}) is impractical with
-gold (as is the validation that the gold is pure). With eGold, Zanetti plans to
+are problematic, as giving change
+% This heavy use of "()" makes it difficult to read. If you want to make
+% this point, maybe in the design principles/plug at the end
+%(the exact problem GNU Taler~\cite{dold2019}
+%solves for Chaum's DigiCash~\cite{chaum1988untraceable})
+is impractical with
+gold as is the validation that the gold is pure. With eGold, Zanetti plans to
``establish a private competitor to the Swiss National Bank, that is not able
to deflate economic crises by inflating the currency at the expense of the
working class''.\footnote{Personal communication.} It remains to be seen if
@@ -303,10 +307,11 @@ associated dangers for individual freedom and
democracy~\cite{Helbing2019,french2021}.
An interesting aspect that all these electronic payment systems based on a
-tokenization system like Taler would share is that they require some trust
-into the issuer of the currency, as in all cases the issuer could reneg on its
-promise to redeem the electronic tokens for the underlying asset. With Taler
-it is possible for third parties to audit the issuer of
+tokenization system would share is that they require some trust
+into the issuer of the currency, as in all cases the issuer could renegotiate on its
+promise to redeem the electronic tokens for the underlying asset.
+%FIXME: Should this also/instead be a design principle at the end?
+For such systems it should possible for third parties to audit the issuer of
tokens~\cite{dold2019}, which in the absence of fractional reserve banking
reduces the risk from the issuer to that of the underlying asset class.
