[e-gold-list] Re: Domain Registration
--On Thursday, July 17, 2003 00:22 -0500 Randy Wilhite [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a url offering domain registration using Egold as payment ? http://dns.vanrein.org/ He gives very good service. I've been using him for years now. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: R: Re: Buying / Selling e-gold? ExchangeProvider Daily Rates.
--On Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:43 +0200 PBG Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, not charging an arm and a leg is one thing, selling at a loss is different. Either you are planning NOT to honor your commitment to clients, or you can't add up numbers, both of which are extremely dangerouselements. Customers will get burned and their confidence towards the whole DGC exchange community will be shaken What about 1MDC? While not an exchange provider, it is without fees, even though 1MDC certainly has to pay e-gold the agio costs. Couldn't it be that Privagold uses a similar strategy in order to attract customers? In fact, a look at their homepage shows that they also sell other things, like debit cards. Why isn't is possible for them to make a small loss on the exchange business, making that up with profits from their other services. A lot of companies in the real world do that (think inkjet printers, gilette razors etc). I do not know their business models, but the above two are just two examples which could explain their fee structure. How can you sell gold at 1% with payment via MoneyBookers interface (which by the way is a cute way of hiding your true bank acocunt details from clients, I wonder why??)? MoneyBookers charges 2%... So you are out 1% there (at least) I've used MoneyBookers in the past, to buy and sell gold from Icegold (pity they stopped accepting it), and there is no 2% charge. The spend fee is 1% with a cap of EUR 0,50. Withdrawing funds using bank transfers has a fixed fee, uploading is free. But given enough liquidity that should not be necessairy that often. While I would not use them myself just based on their rates (I'd like to get some positive feedback from someone else first, especially because they are new), I do not see why their current rates are impossible. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: FUNDING MADE EASILY AND QUICKLY
--On Sunday, March 16, 2003 08:27 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Prominence Bank (www.prominencebank.com)now offers funding and exchange services for E-Gold and Evocash customers. ALL FUNDS ARE TRANSFERED OR PLACED WITHIN 14 HOURS AFTER FUNDS ARE RECEIVED About 161 hours ago I placed an order through their website. So far I have not even received wire instructions, even after sending a reminder e-mail. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: EU FUNDING MADE EASILY AND QUICKLY
Why not place an order AT MY site? :) You can fund your e-gold account QUICKLY EASILY (!) by funding my BELGIUM bank account, online, from your NL bank account... I had no intention of actually going through with that order. I was just trying to find out a bit more about the their Dutch banking license ;) Obviously I cannot find any record in the public records of the Dutch National Bank that could be theirs. Edwin (who has been a happy customer of Paul Vahur's Icegold for several years now) --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: A nonhuman CALCULATION!
1. Ace of hearts, Two of clubs, Five of clubs, Six of clubs, King of spades 2. Ace of clubs, Two of spades, Five of spades, Six of spades, King of hearts But wait!! Suits matter because of Flushes (also straight flushes, royal flushes and the like) True, but I am not saying that suits do not matter altogether, just that some hands are equal to others with regard to suit swapping. For instance, with hand (1), some players assert that the best approach is to discard the ace and king. Note that you are only two cards away from a straight flush. (Some video poker strategy manuals suggest badically thats it IS worth going for long shots, two card draws, for the high paying flush + straight hands) (Your analysis could answer this question!) My datafile indeed suggests discarding the ace and king, giving an expected payout of 49.20% of the wager. The best four strategy's are in descending order: 1. Discard ace and king: 0.4920 2. Keep only the king: 0.4666 3. Keep both ace and king: 0.4657 4. Keep only the ace: 0.4649 Or -- in fact -- did you mean Edwin that the above hands are the same -- because you're just swapping suites? Yes, that's indeed what I meant: that swapping suites does not matter, not that suits don't matter altogether. ie, your final rule book is composed of a free form system with reagards suits. ie, your rule book likes something like this: 5-X, 6-X, 9-Y, 10-Y, K-Z where X, Y and Z can be any suite. Basically yes. Hence in that example, you have covered, let me think, four, right? different raw hands with one meta-hand where you variableize the suites ??? Nope, 24 in this case: 4 possibilities for X, 3 for Y and 2 for Z. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: A nonhuman CALCULATION!
While I did end up with the 'PURE joker poker play book', it is not as large as you think: it only contains 178633 entry's. You correctly assessed that order does not matter, but also the suit does not matter in many occasions. For example: the two following hands are identical, except for the suits: 1. Ace of hearts, Two of clubs, Five of clubs, Six of clubs, King of spades 2. Ace of clubs, Two of spades, Five of spades, Six of spades, King of hearts It is easily seen that the optimal strategy for both hands will be the same. For each of those 178633 really different hands, I did try all 32 strategy's. There is 1 strategy that keeps all cards, five the keep four cards, ten that keep three cards, ten that keep two cards, five that keep one card and one that keeps no cards at all. The total number of calculations for those 32 strategy's combined then is: 1 + 5.48 + 10.48.47/2 + 10.48.47.46/6 + 5.48.47.46.45/24 + 1.48.47.46.45.44/120 = 2869685 This brings the total number of calculations down to 5.13 x 10^11, which is certainly doable if the 'calculation' is simply a table lookup as you suggest. In fact, my program was not that smart, as I did not take into account that order did not matter in drawing the new cards (oops, thanks for pointing this out). I did add a few more optimizations though, and I estimate my initial run did about 7 x 10^12 lookups and the second run (I made a slight error in the scoring function, so I had to run it again) contained a few more optimizations, reducing it to about 3 x 10^12. Both runs combined took about 120 hours on an Athlon XP 1800+ with 512 MB RAM. Combining all optimizations (including the one you suggested, that order for the new cards does not matter) would bring the 5.13 x 10^11 down to about 7 x 10^10... which would be about an hour on that machine. So I wasted quite a bit ;) Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: A nonhuman player snags 70g of e-gold at TGC!
Citeren SnowDog [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well... it's still queens or better, though they did implement some sort of delay preventing a bot from playing too many hands too fast. They also fail to mention that I also lost money from time to time, but overall the bot did indeed win. There's no reason a bot should win. Even their version of Jacks or Better takes more than the Vegas versions. There are no profitable games there. I agree that most of their games have lower payouts than the Vegas versions. Usually the higher payouts are lower than in the brick and mortar casinos from what I found on the internet. I did a mathematical analysis on all of their games and indeed all but one were below 100% expected payout (some slot machines even below 90% as I detailed in a post to this list last summer). That said, their joker poker is different though. All the vegas machines are kings or better, this one is queens or better for even money. This gives a tremendous advantage, which offsets any lower payout for a royal flush. What I did was for every possible initial hand, determine the best strategy by adding up the payouts for all possible continuations and choosing the strategy with the best average payout. This took quite a lot of computer time (about 120 hours on a pretty fast machine), but in the end I ended up with a list of strategy's that has a net advantage of 1.2%. They should be happy to have a bot play as many hands as possible, even if every hand gives the bot an additional chance to win the bar. The bar is only being given because they hope to win more money from those playing. The more a bot plays, the more they should win -- bar or no bar. I wonder why they limited the speed of joker poker to about 1 game per 15/20 seconds then. All the other games can be played at unlimited speed. It's only 101.2% if played with the payouts in Vegas -- not at TheGoldCasino.com. I clearly dispute that. In fact, from the analysis I found on the web, the Vegas kigs-or-better machine only gives a 0.6% advantage: http://www.thewizardofodds.com/game/vidpoktables.html#jokerwild Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: A nonhuman player snags 70g of e-gold at TGC!
That is fantastic! How many hands did you play, what was the total wager, what was the total won or lost at the end, and what was the worst draw down? I have logs of 170,932 hands. I did play a few more while testing, but that's one or two thousand at most I think. The results were: Royal flush: 2 5 of a kind: 18 Joker royal: 19 Straight flush: 98 4 of a kind:1391 Full house: 2740 Flush: 2549 Straight: 2879 3 of a kind: 22718 Two pair/Queens or better: 51422 Nothing: 87096 I only wagered the minimum (0.05 grams) to reduce the risk of loosing money, so the total wager was 8,546.60 grams (yes, thats over 8.5 kilo) and total winnings were 76.75 grams. The total advantage was thus only 0.9%, so I was a bit unlucky, but statistically that is possible. I do remember a session when at some point I was at over -20 grams, but that was after winning a bit first. I think the lowest point I hit was around -15 grams. Their news story claims There was a bot concentration around the 10th of the month and now again around the 20th.How many times did you get on the daily finals prize thingy for your efforts? Or was it a waste of time, prize wise? http://www.thegoldcasino.com/prize I don't see one nickname featuring there a lot? Only one daily finalist so far. I played with about 20 different accounts at a time, to increase the speed. So far I've only been an hourly finalist about 20 times or so. This is only on the 17th, 18th and 19th. I did not play around the 10th. depends on the figures above! is it an plain perl script or what? It's a java application. Perl is ugly ;) *ducks* Edwin what a smelly Hmm... what's so smelly about my name? ;) Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: A nonhuman player snags 70g of e-gold at TGC!
I think it's _really-cool_ of TGC to allow robots, but apparently 'bots occasionally exploit a few little vulnerabilities. I strongly suspect the original motivation for running it is that beautiful 10oz bar, since 'bots play WAY more hands than a human. http://www.thegoldcasino.com/newsroom/ So, queens-or-better goes back to kings-or-better on Joker Poker! Mmmm...70 grams, *while* also trying for a 10oz bar!! Well... it's still queens or better, though they did implement some sort of delay preventing a bot from playing too many hands too fast. They also fail to mention that I also lost money from time to time, but overall the bot did indeed win. In fact, the expected payout given optimal play is about 101.2%. Of course a human would not play perfectly, bringing it below 100% (and that's why they probably offer it), but of course a computer can... And playing lots of hands minimizes the risk of loosing money. Anyone interested in buying the script, while it still is a queens of better machine? ;) Would 5 grams be a reasonable price? Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: SR (was Re: Maybe they're winning
There also seems to be a growing number of lawsuits between the companies involved (e-gold vs. goldmoney, e-gold vs. Charles Evans, e-gold vs. and on, and on) The Evans case was recently withdrawn by e-gold, two days after the final award in the Digigold case: http://www.systemics.com/legal/digigold/#evans GSR withdraws case On 30th August 2002, the case was withdrawn from the court, dismissed without prejudice. In the United States, apparently, a filer has the right to withdraw until the 1st question has been asked in hearings. A reasonable person would postulate that Evans was sued in order to interfere with the Systemics Inc., case. Evans could have provided key testimony as to the internal understandings of the DigiGold.net Agreement, but was not available for this purpose, because of the filing. Edwin --- 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: We are in NL. Q about ISP.
Graham Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guys, We have just arrived in Maastricht, NL. Does anyone know of a NL ISP, where you can use dial up access, via a 1800 (or similar) number? Where they charge a monthly access fee? Unfortunately, there are none that provide flat fee dial up access. Flat fee is limited to ADSL and cable providers. There are however several free providers for which one only pays the cost of local calls. Try one of the following: http://www.12move.nl/ http://www.zonnet.nl/ http://www.freeler.nl/ Edwin --- 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: Cheque or electronic bank transfer service in theNetherlands?
--On maandag 22 juli 2002 21:41 +1000 Ian Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have often heard from those who offer to send a check or wire in the USA, but who provides this in Europe (Holland)? Checks are not used anymore in The Netherlands. We used to have them, but given that they were not used much the banks decided to get rid of them when the Euro came. I have regularly used IceGold over the last few years to convert gold into money in my dutch bank account. Paul Vahur and his employees have always given me very good service. While they are located in Estonia, the money shows up in my account within a few days. Sometimes even within a day, even though I'm using their slowest service. As banks in The Netherlands do not charge as much for incoming international payments, so the cheapest option is to choose receival fees paid by receiver. In total the international wire fees from Estonia and The Netherlands combined are then usually less than EUR 15. Eurogoldline may also have a dutch bank account, but I have no experience with them. If they do, it's probably cheaper to use them, as bank transfers within The Netherlands are essentially free. Let me know if you decide to use them, as I'm interested in your experiences then. Edwin --- 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] Who is Standard Reserve - Part 5
Standard and Fully Reserved August 14, 2001, Road Town, Tortola. Standard Reserve becomes the holder of value in the Standard Group of Companies. As of September 1, 2001 the Standard Reserve Special Purpose Trust will be declared effectively placing all monies in the Standard Online System in the care of Trustees and managed by an Asset Manager. Mr Barry Downey, the Chief Executive Officer of Standard Reserve Issue Limited, stated today that this was a giant leap forward in the way customer funds were being managed by the Standard Group. As the new Chief Executive Officer, Mr Downey has had a busy time in establishing the Trust, identifying Trustees and defining policies as to how the underlying assets of E-Gold (Digital Gold) and USD is to be handled. Essentially what this means to our customers is that all Gold and Dollars are kept in Trust for and on behalf of each customer. The assets are maintained in liquid form for an immediate use by customers when they choose to direct their funds in one direction or another through the online interface, stated Dr Elwyn Jenkins, Chief Executive Officer of the parent company Standard Reserve Holdings Limited. The Standard Reserve site at www.standardreserve.com will become the official site of Standard Reserve Issue Limited, the company that has one job to do -- look after the funds and maintain them in a liquid form for immediate use by customers as and when they so determine. Essentially, through the Currency Distribution Contract with Standard Transactions (BVI) Limited, Standard Reserve provides the asset management services and has contracted with Standard Transactions to be the sole worldwide currency distributor and exchange services company. It is Standard Transactions that sells accounts, cards, currency and all the tools you need to send money around the world to pay for goods and services across national borders. Currently Standard Reserve Issue Limited begins its operations with approximately a million dollars worth of Gold and USD in Trust. This has built from a zero balance just seven months ago. The appointed Trustee for the Standard Reserve Special Purpose Trust is Leadenhall Bank and Trust of Nassau in the Bahamas (www.leadenhallbahamas.com). Leadenhall is the oldest privately owned bank and trust company in The Bahamas. It is the only Bahamian financial institution where 80% of the shares are Bahamian owned - making the goal of localized and personalized service a reality for every customer, every day. And Leadenhall is growing. Since the granting of their bank license in 1998, the company has doubled in size, offering expanded opportunities for individuals worldwide to experience the Leadenhall vision at work. In 2000, Leadenhall was granted a license to provide services in Bahamian dollars. This expands our capacity to service the domestic market and helps us realize our vision of being a strong local and international financial institution. The Standard Reserve Special Purpose Trust guarantees that the value underlying the Standard Gold and the Standard Dollar asset is maintained with a very small amount of money that can be made in holding the assets offsetting the cost of hiring Trustees and Asset Managers, thus ensuring no costs as passed on to customers. This is the safest way to keep your cash online, Dr Elwyn Jenkins points out. This is where you keep your cash in readiness to do business with the world. --- 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: Barry Downey's nominal appointment to CEO ofStandard Reserve Issue Ltd.
--On woensdag 10 juli 2002 3:35 -0400 Barry K. Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1.Because Douglas Jackson and I were instrumental in arranging an investment in Standard Reserve Holdings Limited, by Ancien Ltd. (a Bermuda corporation), Douglas Jackson and I were appointed as outside directors of SRHL. Ok, so this makes Barry Downey one of the directors that issued the statement that is currently on http://www.standardreserve.com/ Let me quote a piece from that statement: quote Standard Reserve Issue Ltd. must suspend all further acceptance of customer deposits and must cease issuing Standard Gold (SR-AUG) or Standard Dollar (SR-USD) pending determination whether Standard Reserve Issue Ltd. may continue as a going concern. /quote So this suggests that SRIL (of which Barry Downey is the CEO) is in fact issuing currency. [big snip] Formal separation of issuance and settlement activities from Standard Transactions Ltd. and its exchange activities was to be implemented upon declaration of the special purpose trust. Until that separation, Standard Transactions Limited continued to perform all of these activities. Hmm... this sound rather contradictory to the statement above right? Given that both statements came from Barry Downey it seems he is contradicting himself for some reason Edwin --- 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: domains with e-gold
Danny Van den Berghe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a domain registered with Jhcloos.net , but that site seems to be out of business I have only one month left to renew the domain. What can I do? I moved all my domains to Rick van Rein: http://dns.vanrein.org/ Transferring your domain to him is pretty easy: just fill in the forms, reply to an automatically generated e-mail confirming that you really want to move, and that's it. Edwin --- 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: e-gold under attack by robots
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: e-gold does need to immediately: add protection against robot attacks on the log in. [snip] That would give e-gold a huge advantage over digigold Uhm... digigold used public key based authentication. Clearly that is superior to any password based mechanism with regard to robot attacks. Edwin --- 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: Simple is Better
C. Cormier - Ormetal Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First, europeans currencies will be gone for sure eventually. Keep it simple and show the reality. Second, I would order the unit descriptions by their importance: grams US Dollars' worth EMU Euros' worth ... ... Third, I would make the gram as the default not the USD. The reason is simple. Show what e-gold really is. Agreed on all three points. Also, the EMU is something most people in Europe here have never heard about. Just Euros' worth would be sufficient imho. Edwin --- 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: Those mysterious microspends
Julian Dibbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: which we can round down to $10 for simplicity's sake. Remember, though, that the path of that $10 from one end of the e-gold system to the other generates more than just a single $10 spend. First the in-exchange entails a $10 spend from a market maker's account to the investor's account. Then the $10 goes into the HYIP's account, for another spend. Then it comes out of that account as payouts, for another $10 worth of spends. And finally, it leaves the e-gold system as yet another $10 worth of spends to market makers, for out-exchange. Total value of spends per day per account: $40. In my experience [*], the path followed is not exactly this one. The payouts from one HYIP are many times invested again in another HYIP or even the same HYIP again (to show their 'confidence' in the program). This would mean that the total value of spends per day per account would be closer to $25 or $30. 75,000 HYIP accounts X $40/day = $3 million ...or pretty much *all* e-gold velocity. 75,000 X $25/day = $1,875,000 = 62,5% of 3 million 75,000 X $30/day = $2,250,000 = 75,0% of 3 million This sort of makes sense: based on your estimate of 75% of the accounts being involved with HYIP's, this makes up for 60%-75% of the total velocity. Edwin [*] This experience is mainly from the early days of the e-gold HYIPs, when sites like DigitalStocks, EMutualFun etc were around. I haven't really been involved after that, but I doubt patterns have changed. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Did you know that the new e-gold Secure Random Keypad can help you to protect your passphrase from both keystroke mouse- click sniffing trojan viruses? You can find out more about computer security at: http://www.cert.org/tech_tips/home_networks.html
[e-gold-list] Re: Those mysterious microspends
Edwin Woudt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my experience [*], the path followed is not exactly this one. The payouts from one HYIP are many times invested again in another HYIP or even the same HYIP again (to show their 'confidence' in the program). This would mean that the total value of spends per day per account would be closer to $25 or $30. I just noted that I left out a part of my reasoning to get to this value: the reason for these values is that for every $20 of investment and payout of a HYIP, there is no $20 going trough the market makers, because the gold stays in the system for a while. So on $20 of investment, I estimate it will be just $5 or $10 instead going trough market makers. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Did you know that the new e-gold Secure Random Keypad can help you to protect your passphrase from both keystroke mouse- click sniffing trojan viruses? You can find out more about computer security at: http://www.cert.org/tech_tips/home_networks.html
[e-gold-list] Re: !!!!!! 400 oz bars ARE SUPPOSED TO vary in weight, by pounds each way.
Ken Griffith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. They always buy bars that are 400 oz + and just truncate them to 400 for the sake of simplicity in the examiner. So really, there's more gold there. Another possible solution: they always buy a bar that keeps the total average bar weight above 400 ounce. This way e-gold can always be fairly close to the right weight. So if the current available weight = 56010 ounces, then the next bar should be at least 390 ounces in order to keep the weight at 56400 or higher. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] response to Separation of Protocol (fwd)
-- Forwarded Message -- Date: wednesday 25 juli 2001 12:13 -0400 From: Ian Grigg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: response to Separation of Protocol Ken, thanks for the kind words in your recent article Separation of Protocol, which I read this morning. http://www.goldbankone.com/article.php?sid=129mode=nestedorder=0 It is always good to see when people appreciate a viewpoint! I'd like to add some comments. I don't think I disagree with anything you wrote, I'd just like it to go further :-) And, further we have gone. When we did our issuance and trading work in the early days, by issuing bonds in Systemics ($10 zeroes, traded against a dollar), we discovered that the Issuer cannot be the software provider, nor the Operator. Simply put, people thought that the system lost credibility if the same people behind the contract also had control of the technical implementation of the contract. We weren't trusted if we were both the issuer of the dollar and the accounter of the dollar. Since then, Systemics has had a pretty firm rule: We do not Issue. I'm not talking about toy contracts such as the Glitter I made up for testing purposes, nor the marbles that Edwin wrote to test his new software. I'm talking about real issuances such as dollars, metals, bonds and shares. Slowly but surely, we've managed to get that model out there. We are hoping to soon announce the first issue where the Mint role - the creator of all float - is actually an external party, without any control or direction other than contracted instructions from the Issuer. I.e., he is not one of us dressed in a different badge. When it comes to the software, it is a little more complex. I'll throw in some observations and let you come to your own conclusions. Firstly, we practice what you preach. The entire protocol for the Ricardo payment system is called SOX, and it is part of the WebFunds open source project that we have been setting up for some time. http://www.webfunds.org/ gets you there, and the source is there and usable. The licence is either a Mozilla or a SISSL, we're not sure which yet. (We have to make our money somewhere, so we sell licences to the Ricardo Issuance Server built upon the protocol.) Regardless of all that, not everybody agrees with our way of doing things. Money is a particularly vexing product, and there are different models out there as to how to issue the stuff. Those models implicate the software: the code that we open- sourced onto WebFunds does not, for example, help a PayPal-style issuer one jot. It's not even so useful for the standard GBC issuer. The problem with the Ricardo architecture is that it requires external third parties, the users, to have special code, that which is called the WebFunds client. Why is this? It comes down to not trusting the Operator. Above, we discussed that the Issuer should be separated from the software people, as a corollary, I hope you'll accept that the same applies to the operator of the software. We then are left only with the problem that the operator of the software can dive in and fiddle the numbers at will. Remember the infamous 8 account from the Barings crash? Any operator can do that. I could, hypothetically, right now, dive into the Hansa Dollar issuance server and create a secret amount of money and then use it in some nefarious fashion. So our mission as financial cryptographers is to construct a system where the operator is not really given that opportunity, and that is what Ricardo does. In the SOX protocol, in the Ricardo payment cycle, the client software sends a digitally signed payment instruction. The issuance server takes that payment instruction, and creates a digitally signed receipt. The receipt is only valid with a validly signed payment enclosed. And that's only creatable by the user. So, what we've done is to create an auditable chain of transactions that the operator cannot forge. Yes, the operator can create some magic account, but an audit will spot that and identify the fraud. But to achieve all that we need to have clients out there that distrust the server. That's WebFunds. Unfortunately we are now against the rock of the marketplace: the mass of users want a website with a password. There is a middle ground, wherein we maintain the architecture necessary to construct a trustworthy money system, and we give the user a web site. It's done by building a web site out of the WebFunds core system, and having WebFunds users alongside the SSL protected users. Put the two of them together and you have a unified system: sophisticated users watching the issuer, and less sophisticated users getting the ease of access required. We hope to build this system one day, soon, and try out the concept. But, as I said above, not everyone agrees with us. And, there is another middle ground that allows the confused merchant to extract harmony out of chaos. That way is the
[e-gold-list] Pecunix (was: Re: e-Bullion Article)
The Snipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1) They did not SPECIFICALLY target MLM/Gaming/Scam. MLM and Gaming are mentioned. nowhere do I see the word scam in the prospectus. Of course they don't mention scams in a prospectus. But mentioning MLM and Gaming is exactly the same. How many MLM/Gaming 'opps' based on other GBC's turned out the be scams? 90%? 95%? Where in the prospectus do they tell you that they only target the 5 or 10% of legitimate ventures? Looking at the growth numbers they propose this looks even almost mathematically impossible to achieve if they only targeted the legitimate ones. 2) If that were true e-gold would have been shut down long ago . First of all: governments work slow, so there is no guarantee yet that e-gold will not be shut down eventually. But the thing is: e-gold did explicitly support scams. It even did something against some scams (freezing accounts), so that may have saved them. Edwin PS: Even more interesting is the following phrase in their prospectus: During the year 2000 e-gold experienced explosive growth, partly due to work done by the founders of pecunix incorporated. Now that we all know where this growth of e-gold came from, what does this mean? --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: More Newbie questions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digigold relies on an electronic wallet on the client's PC, e-gold uses a standard web browser only. Is this significant? I mean, is there an advantage to an e. wallet? It looks like a pain in the butt to me, since it is yet another piece of software to clutter up my computer (and possibly conflict with other software). In general, if you want end-to-end governance, you need an e. wallet on your PC. If you don't want that (if you are prepared to trust the operator of the currency), then it is generally not worth the trouble. The only other issue that you'd probably need to worry about is that the wallet-based versions are capable of much more advanced applications. I am not sure that I understand the difference. Don't you also have a Digigold account? Isn't the receipt acknowledgement of that account? Is there any advantage to receipts .vs. accounts? Much of the above may be moot if Digigold is gone, but other similar schemes may appear, and this would help me (and maybe others) to understand. In an account-based scheme, you have a balance that is managed by a central server. Your account has a series of debit and credit entries against it. Those entries can be created normally at the behest of the SSL screen, protected by your password, but could also be created by the system operator. In a receipt-based system, the account is based on a series of receipts. Each receipt is signed by the server, and is based on a payment that is signed by the payer. Therein lies the difference. In this scheme, the user has to provide a payment, digitally signed, for which she has to have a key. In Ricardo (the underlying software which digigold uses), this is a public key pair based on RSA or DSA. That payment is sent to the server, and the server issues a receipt that acts as a transfer between accounts. The difference is that the receipt cannot be forged, neither by the server nor the payer. So, in this scheme, the system acts more like a cash scheme: once the money has transacted, then it's done. Further, the money can't be transacted without all the proper permissions in place. In an account scheme, anyone on the inside can manipulate and forge records, so you are at the mercy of the Operator. 2. e-gold .vs. GoldMoney .vs. Standard Reserve: Other than the fee structure, etc., is there any perceived advantage/disadvantage to any of the above? I am especially addressing issues of safety (e.g. Is the gold really there? - and, yes, I know e-gold is audited.), liquidity, etc. It would appear that location of the gold could be an issue, as storage in countries in areas of considerable turmoil may have risks. Also, how secure from failure are the computer systems used to store all this info? This would involve physical location of systems (egad!! an earthquake swallowed up my e-gold records!), system backup and redundancy, etc. I do not have much information here, except that: - Standard Reserve keeps their reserves in e-gold. - Both e-gold and GoldMoney publish where their metals are stored. - All three of them run on Windows NT. - All three of them don't provide any information with regard to backups and redundancy. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: e-Bullion Article
The Snipper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As you have pointed out the main weakness is that some or all of the key players in each company listed reside or have close connections in the US. Pecunix has other problems: they specifically aim the MLM/gaming/scam market (at least in the beginning), thereby introducing a higher risk of being shut down by the authorities. Pecunix Incorporated does not have that disadvantage. The company is registered in Panama and NONE of the major players are in the US. In fact they are in New Zealand if you read the prospectus. And NZ does not have a history of kotowing to the US government. This will only increase the security aspect from the user point of view when it comes to US governmental agencies. I wonder what the Panama and NZ governments will do when they figure out that Pecunix is supporting scams. It's not just the US government that does not like them, even though most 'victims' seem to live in the US. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: whither Euro pricing?
James M. Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The DM is scheduled to disappear at the beginning of the new year, supposedly, but I don't consider myself an authority on European/Euro politics. Now I have a question for you. Is the DM presently pegged to the Euro at a single rate, and if so for how long has it been at that rate? Since Jan 1st 1999 all exchange rates between the euro and the euro currencies have been fixed. For the DEM the official rate is: 1,95583 DEM for 1 Euro. The other relevant rate for e-gold is the FRF: 6,55957 FRF for 1 Euro. Edwin (who has been using this DEM exchange rate far too often now for e-gold spends) --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Digigold vs Systemics
There is an article about the Digigold vs Systemics dispute on Wired. It also contains brief parts about Charles Evans, Gold-Age and EE-Biz. http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,44967,00.html Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re:anyone know about osgold.com and osopps.com ?
gary lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: osgold is supposed to be a gold currency like e-gold and osopps.com seems to be running a loan program but they are related to osgold.com. anyone thinks if it is a real legitimate program ? It looks like a scam, it smells like a scam, especially the 'Guaranteed Investment' part. The only way it could possibly be guaranteed is if the rate of return is only a few percent per year (just like you get on a savings account). But I doubt many people will be interested if this is the case. Anything which guarantees a higher rate of return can only be a scam: those are simply the laws of economics and mathematics. That said, they (deliberately?) don't provide enough information on the website to determine with 100% certainty that they are a scam. I doubt however the USD 85 is worth the risk to find this out. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Domain names
Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know if Cloos is still around and/or operating or if not an equivalent for registering domain names using gold as payment? AFAIK, James is still out of business. Try Rick: http://dns.vanrein.org/ http://dns.vanrein.org/info/payment/e-gold/ http://dns.vanrein.org/info/payment/e-gold/#jhcloos Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Open Letter to Douglas Jackson: E-gold Weakness
BigBooster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rather than a Payment #, e-gold could enhance the system so you use a log-in # which is different from your a/c #. This way, you never reveal your log-in # to anyone. This would make e-gold much more secure. Ok, now here is a trick: Take this log-in #: invent one yourself and make it as long as you want. You won't loose security by choosing one yourself. Now change your e-gold password to include both this log-in # and your old password. For example, if your log=in# is 12087598345 and your password is 'fgsalkjhgkgjfs' your new password is: '12087598345fgsalkjhgkgjfs' To log in to the e-gold site, you now need to enter three things: 1. Your a/c # 2. Your log-in # 3. Your password This way, you'll have the same security as with what you are proposing. Do you see the flaw in your logic yet? Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Open Letter to Douglas Jackson: E-gold Weakness
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just go to a smart card model, if you want high security. It's already working on metalsavings.com, you can use it every day. Not even the smart card model can protect you from all trojans: if you still enter and review your transactions on your normal PC, there is no way for you to be absolutely sure that what you are viewing on the screen is actually what's happening to your account. It does protect against simple key sniffing trojans, unlike the suggestion by BigBooster aka Frederick Mann. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: JH Cloos Domains substitute site
James M. Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://dns.vanrein.org/info/payment/e-gold/ Let me add to this that I know this guy personally and he is a nice and honest guy. I sort of pushed him to accept e-gold, so let's show him that this was a good choice ;-) Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Reply Address...
Khurram Khan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can somebody please change the "Reply to" address of this list to send to the egoldlist and no to the person who wrote the message. Its clear that if we are communicating on a mailing list, we'd want our replys to go back to the mailing list, so they may keep the discussion going. I think this point has been brought up several times. I really don't know why the Reply address isn't to the list. Anybody care to enlighten me? Read this page, 'Reply-To Munging Considered Harmful': http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: PGP question
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PGP private keys are stored in a keyring file on the hard disk. If an intruder were able to steal the private key ring, can he use the private key without the passphrase? No. Is it significantly easier to brute-force the passphrase if one has the private key ring? It depends on the quality of the passphrase. You don't have to worry if your passphrase is strong enough. (Beware that a strong passphrase is much longer than your average 8 char password). Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Banana - ?!
Sidd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I need to buy a book... it is in stock at amazon.co.uk but not at amazon.com! is there a way to do this through banana? I would love to have an interface for amazon.co.uk and amazon.de too. Mostly because the shipping times are much lower than for amazon.com (one or two weeks instead of two or even three months for standard shipping). Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: state of e-gold
e-gold also promises that its currency is backed 100% at all times. In lieu of the below I wonder how true this is??? I remember a time when they did not honour inexchanges for a while. The reason was that they couldn't get hold of a gold bar. They could easily have left the 100% backing for a while, but they didn't. How often do they change their policies and do they only announce after the fact? They have made mistakes in the past in communicating things to their customers. But the current user agreement is pretty strong about this 100% backing. They can't change this without a 10 day notice. BTW: I doubt very much that they will ever change the 100% backing. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: e-gold
markab23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am getting a HTTP1 Server busy with the e-gold site . Also the e-biz sites have been shut down I notice. I wonder if they are related? What's e-biz? Another one of those ponzi scams? If so, then in no way will e-gold be related to it. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: e-gold
"Eric Gaither, Gaithman's E-Gold Exchange" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another one of those ponzi scams? If so, then in no way will e-gold be related to it. How trusting you must be in this inter-related world. Yes, there is a good chance the two are not related, however, due to the volume of money e-biz had in e-gold, my thoughts steer to the relation. Did you ever see the public apology Reid Jackson posted on the e-biz site? Like I said, I have no clue at all about what e-biz is. So I haven't seen their website. Do you or anyone else have a copy of this public apology? (BTW: is Reid still an e-gold/gsr employee?) Oh, and uhm... I indeed trust e-gold and GSR not to be actively involved in any ponzi scam. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Standard Reserve and Privacy
The SS# requirement also stopped my application for their debit account. I'm also curious why SR want this number. I can see the need for a passport number or driver's license number for identification purposes (even though it is pretty useless without verification). But AFAIK a social security has nothing to do with 'telling who you are'. (I must admit that I do not know too much about social security numbers in the US. In the country I live in, it is even illegal for businesses to ask for a social security number.) 1. SR is not really opening up to international clients, and you can tell this from their application form. I checked that I was from Costa Rica and therefore did not fill in an SSN as per directions,b ut their system bounced the application for that reason, so I typed in 999-99-. That worked. I was able to submit a test application without SSN, claiming to live in Antigua and Barbados. (note to SR: feel free to delete account 120861) they are showing that they are not part of the freedom movement, but a part of the system most egold users are trying to get themselves out of. SR never claimed to be part of the freedom movement. In fact, they made a clear business decision not to be part of it. If you don't like that: don't do business with them. Time will tell if more people feel like you. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: XG-GOLD
Curtis W Garris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was made aware of this program last evening, the grape vine is indicating that the managers of the program have started and defaulted on several scams with eGold. Can anyone comment one way or the other on this program? The home page is http://www.iamvictory.com/XGgold/25daily.htm Well... do the math. They promise to pay $900 (30 x ($25 + $5)) for every $100 put in. Even if these people are honest, I doubt that this 'program' would be able to run for more than two weeks... Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: IE Link
Craig Haynie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it links you to a list of non-indpendent market makers who may or may not be affiliated with e-gold (or GSR .. or someone) through certain agreements! ; I have to take exception to this because you're implying that there's something sinister, (or under-the-table), going on, when in actuality, anyone can be a listed market maker if they choose to comply with GSR's requirements. You don't want to comply, and hence, you're not listed -- nothing else. What are those requirements? Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: E-Gold outage...
Deen Foxx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: E-Gold site is down again. Be sure to update the "Recent Outages" please. It works fine for me. Edwin --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
