[Cryptography] Anonymous rendezvous (was Business opportunities in crypto)

[Jerry Leichter]

> (a) are "strongly distributed" - "strongly"
> > because we want to assume *no* connections between participants except those
> > explicitly desired; (b) no trusted third parties.  It's from (a) that we get the whol
> > notion of anonymous rendezvous:  Any two parties can engage in truste
> > communication of a set of messages with each other without any communication
> > outside of those messages.  What I contend - and I believe you agree - is that
> > requirement cannot be met.  And it cannot be met, not because of weaknesses in
> > the cryptography, but because it simply makes no sense.
> 
> Suppose we have a bunch of strongly pseudonymous *public* forums. (Zooko names,
> or bitmessage type names.)
> 
> Better, suppose we have a strongly pseudonymous crypto currency and/or lighting
> network, and a bunch of strongly pseudonymous businesses, many of whose
> employees and contractors are strongly pseudonymous.
> 
> *Now* does it make sense?
> 
> Now it makes sense.
Introducing a bunch of fancy words doesn't change anything.  No, it still makes no sense.  If you don't know who you're talking to, adding a layer of indirection only makes things worse.  Now you're talking to the pseudonym of someone you don't know.  This helps ... how?
                                                        -- Jerry