[e-gold-list] Re: How Penny Per Page Might Work
At 03:21 PM 11/25/2001 -0500, David Brooks wrote: How is e-gold useful? Transaction fees are orders of magnitude larger than the transaction amount. Steve, With respect, I believe you do not understand the transaction fee structure of e-Gold. This is quoted from the e-Gold webpage: http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/fees.htm The fee for this transaction is 1% of the transaction amount, subject to a maximum of 50 cents (US$) equivalent value. Steve and I experimented with very small e-gold transactions tonight - if he sent me .1 ounces of gold (USD .002728), I received .06 ounces (USD .001637), and e-gold took .04 (USD .001091) for their spend fee .. which is a spend fee of 40 percent, not 1 percent. I think it's entirely reasonable for the e-gold folks to insist on a floor or minimum charge for transaction processing - because that does have a cost - but it's not well disclosed. I get the impression that .04 ounces is the minimum spend fee, from playing with the calculator at the URL indicated above. I'm still far from convinced that micropayments are important, but e-gold doesn't seem to be a good way to do them if micro means under USD .10 or so. (I get the impression that it might be possible to go a lot lower than that if one used silver, not gold, as the limited factor seems to be ounces, not USD of transaction value - but I don't have any silver to play with, and it's not that interesting to me anyway. Similarly, I wonder about small transactions with higher-value metals. Perhaps other list members are more motivated than I with respect to those experiments.) -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 4000 dead in NYC? National tragedy. 1000 detained incommunicado without trial, expanded surveillance? National disgrace. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gold.com/stats.html lets you observe the e-gold system's activity now!
[e-gold-list] Re: Anonymous remailer, HDD-encryption and e-gold structuring
At 04:46 PM 12/2/2001 -0500, CDK wrote: Hello, This message serves to announce the availability of PRIVACY.LI, a service site to foster electronic privacy. We offer anonymous remailers, which can also RECEIVE mail real time! Only accepted form of payment is e-gold!. I would like to know more about the people who are offering these anonymizing services, since, ironically enough, their discretion and reputation is essential to creating and maintaining confidence among their clients that the anonymizing is really provided as promised. I went and looked to see who holds the PRIVACY.LI domain name - it's recorded as Debax, Inc. Lee Nguy Internet Hosting Casino Str, Bryan Bldg.,309-95 4537 PH-1200 Palanan, Makati, Metro Manila Philippines .. the hostname privacy.li resolves to the IP address 212.204.235.51 right now, and a traceroute to that address suggests that the machine is located in Amsterdam - traceroute to privacy.li (212.204.235.51), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets [...] 4 sl-gw12-sj-1-1.sprintlink.net (144.232.217.17) 11.506 ms 11.808 ms 13.102 ms 5 sl-bb25-sj-6-2.sprintlink.net (144.232.3.141) 12.724 ms 14.209 ms 12.692 ms 6 sl-bb22-sj-12-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.3.209) 198.434 ms * * 7 144.232.9.86 (144.232.9.86) 14.856 ms 14.496 ms 15.197 ms 8 acr2-loopback.NewYork.cw.net (206.24.194.62) 84.649 ms 85.654 ms 83.724 ms 9 bcr2-so-6-0-0.Amsterdam.cw.net (206.24.193.226) 167.786 ms 166.522 ms 166.543 ms 10 208.173.209.182 (208.173.209.182) 167.234 ms 168.065 ms 166.979 ms 11 212.204.235.51 (212.204.235.51) 169.205 ms 168.083 ms 168.544 ms The privacy.li website itself says, regarding the principals/operators of the service: Company Profile Actually, this is not to be published here:-) A privacy service like ours is best if not too many details are known, we hope you fully understand and support this. The makers of this page are veterans at the chosen subject, and will under no circumstances jeopardize your privacy. .. which sounds like BS to me; these guys want to handle payments and provide privacy services, which are both very sensitive tasks, but don't want others to know who they are, where to find them, or what they've done in the past. (Not that there's anything wrong with privacy - it's a basic human right, and a very good thing. But if I'm going to trust someone with my money, or my identity, I want to know about both their competence and their fidelity, and it's pretty hard to reach that level of trust with an anonymous entity.) I also looked for Debax, Inc. on Google, and found this page http://www.appleby.net/netscam/FPCscam.html - which is operated by a person who claims that the people behind privacy.li are also operators of a privacy consultancy which took USD $2000 as a bank wire from a potential client for a Panamanian shelf corporation with a Swiss bank account, control of which was never delivered as promised. It would, of course, be very good to learn that a reputable anonymizing or payment-processing service is available for projects of a sensitive nature - but I can't say that the information easily available to me has yet inspired confidence in this venture. Perhaps the folks at privacy.li would like to provide more details about their personnel and operation? Even assuming, arguendo, that they are reputable privacy consultants from time immemorial, I'd still like to hear about the technical backgrounds of the people who built the system(s) which provide the services - the most honest and discreet people in the world can't run a useful privacy service on top of a system which is infested with hostile intruders. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 Eliminate due process, civil rights? It's the Constitution, stupid! --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gold.com/stats.html lets you observe the e-gold system's activity now!
[e-gold-list] Re: Anonymous remailer, HDD-encryption and e-gold structuring
At 01:02 PM 12/4/2001 -0500, you wrote: UPDATE For Greg: www.nic.ch updated today the new ownership of www.privacy.li you may want to check it out at your leisure sometimes even miracles ahappen:-) When you say updated today the new ownership, what do you mean? Has the company changed hands in the last 3 days, or just the domain name? Or have you simply removed the publicly visible information which was linked to an entity which was involved in a dispute regarding misuse of entrusted funds? You're going to have to be a lot more forthcoming before I'd dream of sending you any gold or recommending you to someone seeking privacy. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 Eliminate due process, civil rights? It's the Constitution, stupid! --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gold.com/stats.html lets you observe the e-gold system's activity now!
[e-gold-list] Re: [dgc.chat] now THERE's a Scoop!
At 01:13 PM 12/7/2001 -0800, Vince Callaway wrote: On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Goldlist Cynic wrote: Interesting... Seems like Doug is quite happy to get into bed with the HYIP guys As long as the money goes directly into his pocket! Thats a bullshit statement. When a new company is out raising venture capital you have very little information on the investors. Only if you've never been screwed before, or don't have competent advisors. Taking on investment capital is a serious step which forms a long-term relationship - and the people selling their equity in a company (directly, or through dilution) need to know who they're going to be working with, what their investment goals and strategies are, what their exit strategy is, and how they've handled previous investments .. including how they've handled disappointment or diverging business visions. None of that means that the GSR guys are tainted with the (alleged) criminal nature of their investors, or their investors' investors - but the idea that one doesn't know (or care) about one's investors is a very bad idea. (Of course, there may be circumstances where investors make an investment in securities in bearer or anonymous form, and it's consequently difficult for outsiders to construct a clear picture of the ownership structure and relationships - but that doesn't mean that the participants themselves are, or ought to be, in the dark with respect to their business partners.) -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 Eliminate due process, civil rights? It's the Constitution, stupid! --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gold.com/stats.html lets you observe the e-gold system's activity now!
[e-gold-list] Due diligence and VC's
At 08:56 PM 12/8/2001 +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 4:01 PM -0800 12/7/01, Greg Broiles wrote: When a new company is out raising venture capital you have very little information on the investors. Greg, I agree that e-gold (GSR .. whatever) is not to blame, BUT, teh above is just not correct. You suffer due dilligence up the ass re: investors. I think you have misattributed the above (re very little information) - Vince Callaway wrote that, and I quoted it in order to disagree with it. The venture capital model I'm familiar with looks like the following - A group of managers (let's call them Muttonhead Venture Partners) talks to investors and raises a pool of capital, which is held by an entity (perhaps a partnership, or a corporation, or an LLC/LLP).. in this case, let's call it Muttonhead Technology Venture Fund I formed for investment purposes. The managers raise a certain amount of money and invest it according to some parameters they've described in advance to the investors. They get an ownership share in the investment company, and charge management fees which the investment company pays, in exchange for handling the investments and business of the investment company. They may form several of those investment companies (Muttonhead Technology Venture Fund II, Muttonhead Biotech Venture Fund, etc.) depending on how busy they are and how much capital is available. The managers then review business plans and meet with managers/owners of existing or proposed businesses (let's imagine a hypothetical Nifty Internet Thing), to find what they consider good candidates for investment. If they find a company which seems to be a good match for a fund's purpose, and are able to reach mutually agreeable terms for an investment, the investment company purchases shares (or makes a loan which is convertible to equity) in the new business venture. Now, if Vince Calloway is saying that the entrepreneurs in charge of Nifty Internet Thing aren't going to be able to learn or care much about the big boring companies or orthopedic surgeons or whoever else put up the capital which went into Muttonhead Technology Venture Fund I which then gets invested in their company, then, yeah, I agree with him. But if he's saying that the entrepreneurs can't or don't need to bother learning about the histories, reputations, other investments, conflicts of interest, business/personal contacts, and so forth, about the partners who make up Muttonhead Venture Partners (who are likely to end up with control of one or more Nifty Internet Thing's board seats, as well as a fair amount of control over Nifty Internet Thing's ability to raise capital in the future), or the other investments that Muttonhead Venture Partners have made, and how they've fared afterwards, well, then I still disagree. It's not very hard at all to find out what investments a reputable VC has made (at least not the ones that turned out well :), who the partners are, what's on their resumes, what other boards they sit on, and what their expertise is (and is not). Read Red Herring - look at their website - run their name through Google and see what conferences they spoke at, and what they talked about. And, yeah, absolutely, the guys at Muttonhead Venture Partners are going to be all over the guys who run Nifty Internet Thing, their books, their IP, and all of the rest, to make sure that they're not giving a few million dollars to a bunch of idiots or crooks who are going to waste or steal the money. And the guys at Nifty Internet Thing ought to return the favor, because the VC's are in business to make money for themselves, not for entrepreneurs - that's just a side effect. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 Eliminate due process, civil rights? It's the Constitution, stupid! --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.e-gold.com/stats.html lets you observe the e-gold system's activity now!
[e-gold-list] Re: [dgc.chat] ** hacker! **
At 09:32 AM 3/31/2002 -0800, jeff fitzmyers wrote: All market makers that handle big volumes of gold have to SERIOUSLY think about security. Thanks for the interesting info JP! For us self taught coders that might have educational gaps, do you have a link or protocol for security? Ross Anderson's Security Engineering: A Guide to Building Dependable Distributed Systems and Garfinkle Spafford's Web Security, Privacy, and Commerce are both helpful in this regard, and available from all of the usual suspects. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: New payment server, possibly useful for exchange providers
At 03:42 PM 5/15/2002 +, major bosco wrote: Even when the Card issuing Bank AUTHENTICATES the user -- the Chargeback rate is only reduced by 50% !! Just goes to show how weak/ soft Credit Cards are. Why is this surprising? Chargebacks aren't only used in cases where the buyer's card has been stolen or misappropriated .. they're also used where the buyer believes that the seller has not performed their end of the bargain, and hence is not entitled to payment, so it doesn't seem so remarkable that authenticating the buyer fails to eliminate that risk. And, yes, sure, moving to a harder payment scheme reduces or eliminates that risk to the merchant .. by shifting it to the buyer, which changes the ratio of successful to unsuccessful transactions .. not only by reducing the number of unsuccessful ones, but by also reducing the successful ones, because buyers don't always trust sellers, and don't like bearing all of the risk of transaction failure. (not that I've got an easy answer ..) -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Man-in-the-middle attack, was Re: * * * Important information about your e-gold account * * *
This is actually an interesting scam - they're just pointing to data sources on the e-gold page, so the SRK looks fine, and the Turing Test looks and acts like it usually does - it's a nice hack, too bad they're wasting their time on this sort of garbage instead of doing something that's really useful interesting. My recommendation would be to immediately switch to using SSL/https: for ALL access to e-gold; these UI hacks can be too subtle to be noticed easily if you're distracted or in a hurry. And, just like calls on the telephone, don't do business immediately with someone based on their representation of who they are or where they are in the network - get contact info, then independently re-enter it to make sure you're reaching the node they told you you're talking to. At 12:42 PM 6/14/2002 -0400, George Matyjewicz wrote: Hi All: I just got another scam letter from somebody telling you to upgrade your e-gold account! The site is e-golb.com (note B not D). At the bottom they have what appears to be a link to e-gold (the actually URL is shown), but if you click on it, you go to the phony address. They also try to get you to take action quickly with Only after logging in and reading updates you can continue spend e-gold. I wonder how many people will get screwed once again. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: why paypal wins and e-gold not.....
At 12:20 PM 9/20/2002 -0400, Morgan Harry wrote: [...] On the other hand, some exchange providers are able to fund an account in a matter of minutes, so a new account with e-gold can be funded and operated in a very short period of time. Please explain how to do this in a very short period of time; I spent awhile staring at the web pages of exchange providers and they all seem to want some variation of a wire transfer or a cash deposit, both of those requiring an in-person trip to a bank during banking hours, or the payment of significant fees someone like Western Union, again, during business hours and away from my comfy chair. If there's another way - where a person can learn about e-gold, open an account, and have it funded and then buy something without leaving their seat at the computer, I'd sure love to hear about it. I don't mean to say that the exchange providers are bad people, when they want known good funds coming in to exchange for their known good funds going out - I wouldn't want to be on the other end of a chargeback, having paid out irrevocably in the meantime - but I'm trying to figure out whether you see a solution here that others have missed, or if you're saying that from your perspective the logistical hurdles involved in funding an e-gold account shouldn't be such a big obstacle. (Which is a nice argument to make, but arguing that a problem isn't very important isn't the same thing as solving it.) I don't think that extending credit to the exchange providers really solves this problem - I don't care if I can borrow money (or gold) cheaply and easily, if I'm still obligated to pay it back even if my customer magically yanks his payment out of my till 60 days down the road. And, if I (wearing a hypothetical exchange provider hat) don't have to pay it back, then who does? Since this is all backed one-for-one by gold bars, someone's gotta pay for that free lunch. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: why paypal wins and e-gold not.....
At 02:54 PM 9/20/2002 -0400, Morgan Harry wrote: At 12:20 PM 9/20/2002 -0400, Morgan Harry wrote: .. so a new account with e-gold can be funded and operated in a very short period of time. Please explain how to do this in a very short period of time[...] You seem to forget that there are other digital currencies on the market that would do transfers in a matter of seconds, so ESP can exchange those other currencies for e-gold. We all know the horrors of traditional banking, so I think we can leave that part out. The fact is that there are ways to fund e-gold in a very short period of time. Ok, I see. Turtles all the way down.[1] Right. [1] http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2002-June/013121.html -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Dismissed without Prejudice
At 01:58 PM 9/27/2002 -0400, Kenneth C. Griffith wrote: Does dismissed without prejudice mean that GoldMoney has the option to bring the suit again at a later date? Yes. - Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Business Idea
At 12:41 PM 10/9/2002 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] If Ayn Rand was still around she'd probably SHOOT anyone who napster'd a copy of one of her novels or movies. If I use photoshop without paying for it for awhile, I openly call that THEFT. Because that's what it is. THEFT. Private property ... like it or lump it! :) You can call it theft, if you like, and the Napsterites can call it freedom, but you're both being deliberately imprecise, so as to ride the coattails of an argument you're unable to make (or win) head-on. As several people have pointed out, theft has a traditional (and relatively precise) meaning, which doesn't include the making of copies without a copyright owner's permission. Stealing a copy of Photoshop means walking out of CompUSA with the CD hidden under your coat. Infringing Adobe's copyright would be a better way to describe what you're doing if you make a copy of someone else's Photoshop CD (whether you use it for even 10 minutes - or not at all). Both of those activities - theft and copyright infringement - are currently illegal in the United States, though copyright infringement isn't necessarily criminal. Both activities involve interfering with what the law currently defines as another person's property - but the scope and nature of those property rights are neither divinely inspired nor unchangeable. Our local governments' definitions of property and property rights depend a lot to do with what our current ideas are about what sorts of people and what sorts of activities deserve to be compensated, and which don't. Now, the fact that there's a lot of politics involved in the decisions about who gets paid when doesn't mean that it works out very well for each of us to decide on our own which laws we're going to follow and which we're not - things go a lot smoother if we can count on each other to act within the guidelines we've agreed upon, and to change the guidelines if they're stupid instead of just ignoring them. So if you want to say that people who infringe copyrights are lawbreakers (just like people who drive too fast or don't report all their income or don't tell the Man about all their guns), you'll get no argument from me. But if you want to call them thieves, you leave me wondering what's so weak about your position on the issue that you're trying to hide behind distortions and misunderstanding. -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Off Shore Hosting
At 06:46 PM 11/18/2002 -0600, Cassandra wrote: I live in Central America and am considering starting a web-hosting business here. This message is a feeler to see if there is interest in this group. Yes, of course, we would accept payment in e-gold. ^_^ The 2nd question, if you would be interested in Central American hosting, is would you be willing to pay more for hosting here than what it costs for hosting in the US? To get good answers, you probably need to be more specific re what the parameters of the service are, e.g. - What sort of content can be hosted? Porn? Gambling? Nazi? Commercial things advertised with spam? HYIP/Ponzi schemes? Fraud sites which collect access information by pretending to be other sites? Can your customers send or relay spam from your server(s)? How [non] responsive will you be if you're contacted by complainers, police, lawyers, or courts? From other jurisdictions? From your jurisdiction? Do you have assets in popular forum jurisdictions (like the US, France, or Germany) which will make you sensitive to court action in those jurisdictions? Who are your upstream connectivity providers, and what are their answers to those questions? What sort of bandwidth, latency, and uptime guarantees are you willing to provide? What hardware and software platform(s) are you using for hosting, and what is the reputation and experience of the people who are responsible for technical operations and security? What kind of access to the underlying system do your customers get? cgi-bin access? MySQL? PHP, Perl, Python, ASP? sendmail? Are you willing/able to host colocated boxes? -- Greg Broiles -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PGP 0x26E4488c or 0x94245961 --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
