Re: [projectvrm] RSA sat

[Florian Kleedorfer < >]

Hi Mike,

I think I agree with you. Maybe I didn't put it quite right, so let my 
try to clarify:

* Privacy vs benefits of openness: There is a trade-off to be made. For 
example, I could publish all my 'needs' (intentions) online such that 
they are somehow tracable back to me (ip address, 
certificate/signature/webid, name, email address, etc.). That would make 
it relatively easy for independent services to find good matches for my 
needs because they can create an accurate profile of my interests; I 
benefit from good matches. However, I don't think I would want that 
because I think that the totality of my 'needs' (think: shopping list, 
furniture, moving, holiday, transportation (eg, taxi), ...) are 
something worth protecting. Nobody except me should be able to link any 
of them to me. So there's the tradeoff we made: we try to separate the 
'need' from identity by allowing to use a new identity for each one, but 
not enforcing it - so you may (consciously) re-use identities if you 
like. In addition to that, we'll try to make the servers available as 
hidden services in the Tor network, so that This comes at the expense of 
probably less accurate matching.

* Payment solutions: The infrastructure we're building doesn't depend on 
any kind of payment solution, but our goal is to enable users to use any 
of them if they want. Many of the use cases we see don't involve money 
at all (such as finding a dancing partner, or fixing neighborhood problems)


Cheers,
Florian

Am 08.04.2015 um 22:14 schrieb Mike O'Neill:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I liked it till the last sentence,
>
> "Moreover, security and trust issues need to be addressed, and privacy concerns 
> have to be balanced with the benefits of openness. Finally, the infrastructure must be 
> connected to existing payment solutions so as to enable serious trading and allow it to 
> unfold its full potential."
>
> There cannot be a trade-off between privacy and benefits, individual control does not need to be 
> "balanced" -  that is where the rot starts.  Same goes for having to connect to 
> existing payment solutions in order to be "serious". There may need to be an option for 
> them at first, but the system should be able to work without them from the off.
>
> Mike