> Craig wrote
> The problem is that the gold won't be in the thief's account. It will be
> moved to the account of another market maker, or traded for something on
> eBay, BEFORE any action can take place, Thieves who are smart enough to
> trick people out of these passwords will not keep the gold in their account.
At which point e-gold ltd. has two choices...
1) Create e-gold out of thin air to compensate the victim.
2) Track down every last microgram of e-gold and freeze all the accounts
involved, pending investigation. Then upon deciding that repudiation is
somehow warranted, extract the gold from these innocent account holders,
and give it back to original victim.
The 1st choice blantantly disregards the 100% backing rule; or puts a lot
of additional expense on operating e-gold ltd., which would be passed on
to the entire community.
The 2nd choice involves a lot of expense, which would be passed on to the
entire e-gold community, disregards the non-repudiation rule, and creates
many, many completely innocent victims as opposed to 1 victim who was
careless, to some degree, with his passphrase.
The 2nd choice might also involve doing away with the instantly-clearing
rule. Because, it is much easier to repudiate a transaction if the
transaction hasn't cleared yet.
The 2nd choice also brings up another possibility...
Why would you even think about using a currency when money could be taken
away from you simply because it was stolen from somebody else? This is
analagous to the police knocking on your one day to take a $20 bill from
you, because it was stolen from a bank last month.
Neither option is any way, shape, or form viable in any degree.
Which leaves us back where we started; a non-repudiation rule and personal
responsibility.
Viking Coder
________________
Worth Two Cents?
http://www.2cw.org/VikingCoder
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
