Re: big, fast, etc, was is Vax addressing sane today

before and after turn of century we would periodically have threads on
the "bank fraud blame game" (in financial industry mailing lists);
interchange fees that financial institutions charge merchants is base
plus fraud surcharge ... adjusted for the fraud rate for kind of
transactions .... internet transactions can have highest surcharge (with
many banks' profit from fraud surcharge reaching major percentage of
their bottom line)

right after turn of century, several "safe" transaction products were
presented to major online merchants (representing 80% of total internet
payment transactions) which saw high acceptance ... expecting that the
fraud surcharge would be eliminated. Then the cognitive dissonance set
in, they were told that instead of eliminating the fraud surchanged, a
new large "safe" surcharge would be added on top of the existing fraud
surchange ... and all the interest evaporated.

I had co-authored financial industry transaction protocols as well as
done "safe" transaction chip design (that was one of the "safe"
products) ... was one of panel giving talk at standing room only large
ballroom, semi-facetiously saying I was taking $500 milspec chip and
aggresively cost reducing by more than two orders of magnitude while
increasing its security:
https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/conference/1998/10/08/proceedings-of-the-21st-nissc-1998/final
got prototype chips after turn of the century and gave talk in assurance
panal in the trusted computing tract at 2001 IDF
https://web.archive.org/web/20011109072807/http://www.intel94.com/idf/spr2001/sessiondescription.asp?id=stp%2bs13
the guy running trusted-computing TPM chip was in front row and I chided
him that it was nice to see his chip was starting to look more like
mine; his response was that I didn't have a committee of 200 people
helping me with design.

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970