Re: [Taler] [address@hidden: 'Oh, that's an idea...': U.S. parents respond to China screen time ban]

[Jacob Bachmeyer]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
>   > Jacob miss-read my comment because I wrote "their own browser
>   > would not do so” when I should’ve written "their own browser could
>   > not do so.”  In my defence, my entire long comment was about a
>   > type of cryptographic ring signature, and human language has
>   > plenty of error correction, so it’s completely disingenuous to
>   > suddenly read in DRM over one c being a w.
>
> Sorry, I can't follow this.

He had some unclear wording describing a means of implementing something 
similar to TLS client certificates except that the server learns only 
that the client is authorized and not *which* authorized client is 
connecting.  The unclear wording left me with an impression that the 
proposed system required a DRM-like element and I asked for 
clarification.  You (RMS) were involved because you had started the 
thread earlier.

Digital currency is already similar in some aspects to DRM:  both 
introduce scarcity to the digital environment, with the difference being 
that digital currency is intended to mirror an actual real-world 
scarcity while DRM introduces purely artificial scarcity usually 
intending to abuse users for real-world profit.  I am perhaps overly 
sensitive to ensuring we do not accidentally blunder into implementing 
or requiring DRM here.  It is worth noting that DRM can be trivially 
used to implement digital currency; this does not excuse DRM.


-- Jacob