[e-gold-list] private credentials
I have strong issues against using smart cards. Widespread, everyday use of smart cards will be an end to the few remaining shreds of privacy that we still have. Why not simply implant microchips into everybody? It is basically the same thing. Actually, that isn't necessary. Dr. Stephen Brands of Zero Knowledge has developed a system called digital credentials that does digital signatures using zero-knowledge proofs. You could use smart cards as digital signature devices without giving away your identity. It's rather fascinating. The white paper is on the freedom.net website. HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: How is this for service!!!
There's a fourth way - they could have just eaten the $10 and paid it out to keep a happy customer. - Original Message - From: Viking Coder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: e-gold Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 1:29 PM Subject: [e-gold-list] Re: How is this for service!!! any way the next day I received another email message telling me that it would be refunded to me... This morning when I looked in my account there was the refund So, in other words, OSGold has proven that they are a repudiable form of payment. There is only 3 ways that they could have given you a refund. 1) Negate the original payment; just like you do with a bank check, or credit card. 2) Leave the original payment intact, and create your refund of thin air. 3) Leave the original payment intact, and spend the refund from their own account. The first option does away non-repudiability. Why bother with an instantly-clearing financial system, when at any point in the future the transaction could be reversed if the payer complains enough? The second option does away the 150% backing claim, of which only 50% is metal. The whole claim of backing is shoddy in the first place because there is no method is exchange OSGold for the backing. In effect, OSGold becomes no better than the glorious US dollar. The only thing supporting such a currency is the belief in that currency. As long as nobody questions it's validity, it is valid. The third option does away with their profitiability. They would retain both non-repudiability and a claim of backing, but would soon be running real low on cash after granting all the refund requests. Viking Coder Worth Two Cents? http://www.2cw.org/VikingCoder --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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
It is true that by having a pay to account number that is different from the spend account number, it would make it much more difficult to hack accounts. It would also make audit trails more complicated. Public key authentication would be far superior. Because the hacker would need to obtain both your private key and your password, it would be one order of magnitude harder to hack. If the private key were stored on a smart card, it would become virtually impossible to hack unless your passphrase is easy to guess. Any account-based system that uses only a passphrase to access the information is no better than a credit card in terms of security. E-gold has been around for five years now, and public key technology has been around far longer than that. It's time for a security upgrade. Until then get a firewall. Freedom.net software is a great free firewall. Tiny is also a good one. FinJan's Surfin Guard Pro is also an excellent program that detects keyboard sniffers. HK - Original Message - From: BigBooster [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: e-gold Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 6:52 PM Subject: [e-gold-list] Re: Open Letter to Douglas Jackson: E-gold Weakness A hacker (who knew the # of one of my e-gold a/cs) planted a Trojan Horse in my computer that reported my password enabling him/her to raid my account. (He didn't know the a/c #s of any of my other e-gold a/cs, so he/she didn't touch them.) The Trojan Horse was named Kern32.exe and was loaded into my Widows\System folder. It was run by adding files to my Startup menu. Not all Anti-Trojan software recognized the Trojan, but I found a great package that did. I repeat, revealing your a/c # is a huge risk. It gives the hacker half of what he needs to access your a/c. Your e-gold accounts would be much more secure if you had to reveal a Payment # to get paid, and you reveal your a/c # to nobody. Frederick Mann At 03:27 PM 05/23/2001 -0700, Vince Callaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] A hacker (who knew the # of one of my e-gold a/cs) planted a Trojan Horse in my computer that reported my password enabling him/her to raid my account. (He didn't know the a/c #s of any of my other e-gold a/cs, so he/she didn't touch them.) [snip] The only way someone could have hacked your account is a) your passphrase sucks and only took a couple of tries or b) you gave it to them. More than likely is was b) in the form of cliking on an e-qold link instead of e-gold. Having an account number is no security risk. I can go to the E-Gold site and pick a number at random and start trying passwords. Of course I would get locked out in short order, but that is beside the point. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] security
We've been over this before, and my response is the same: It does not solve the real problem, which is that a fool and his password are soon parted. The only effect of such a system would be to change the nature of the scams by which passwords are stolen, _and_ it wouldn't foil a keyboard sniffer attack. This is true. And this is also why a smartcard-based public key cryptosystem is the only real longterm solution. The real problem with any password based system, whether it be credit/ATM cards, e-gold, or GoldMoney is that you can never be certain that there isn't a keyboard sniffer or keyboard bug in your system. Passwords are becoming much easier to capture because of the proliferation of free hacker tools. There is now a worm-building tool that allows any idiot to create new worm viruses that can sniff passwords and send them back to the creator. A smart hacker could easily create a new worm for a particular intended victim and send it as an e-mail attachment that would slip right by an antivirus program because they only recognize widespread viruses. A smart card protected public key encrypted authentication scheme would provide true commercial-grade security. It would make it necessary to steal the physical smart card and the passphrase in order to hack an account. This is the real long-term solution to the problem. The amazing thing is that no one is using it yet. The other long term solution is to completely abandon account based systems and switch to digital bearer instruments or digital cash. These can be stored on the users hard drive in an encrypted form, or stored on a smart card, or stored on a zip disk, offline where hackers can't reach them. Understandably, from a marketing perspective, the easier the system is to use, the more people will use it. However, e-gold and others will have difficulty attracting serious commercial customers until they provide a truly secure payment system. To get people off credit cards, you have to provide something that is BETTER than credit cards. Presently e-gold is about equal to credit cards in terms of security, and somewhat better in terms of non-repudiability. However, as Costa Gold and other examples have shown, even e-gold isn't really non-repudiable. If they think a transaction is fraudulent they will freeze it, so it isn't really like cash. The technology is out there, but so far there hasn't been much implementation of it. I wonder why? HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: security
Julian's law of security: nobody but spooks will pay for security that calls them an idiot. Good software makes the security virtually invisible. People don't mind carrying cards around in their wallets. They already do. If someone produced software and smartcards that were EASY to use it would overcome Julian's Law and reduce transaction costs by eliminating a lot of fraud. The catch is the card readers. If PC and MAC manufacturers would start putting out computers or keyboards with built-in smart-card readers it might catch on. Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: security
For both types (smart cards): - cost and hassle of getting cards - hassle of guarding cards from pickpockets and burglars - hassle of making sure you always have your card when and where you need it - hassle involved when you inevitably lose your card This is arrayed against a plain password which can be handled easily by any software system that can do console IO. And for which the user can chose the level of security, from post-it note to memorization. Julian, for the average consumer there is no doubt you are correct. For a business or bank moving thousands or millions of dollars, the risk of loss is definitely worth the hassle of getting the smart card. For the retail merchant the cumulative loss due to credit card fraud (the merchant eats it) may well be worth the hassle of convincing his customers to go through the hassle of getting smart cards and readers. This can be done by offering them a discount or reward, or giving away cards and readers. People will go to amazing hassle to get free stuff! Hushmail has done a brilliant job of making sophisticated encryption invisible and simple to use for the end user. Of course, Hushmail doesn't solve the particular problem we are talking about (keyboard sniffers) BUT they have shown that encryption can be made popular by embedding it in user friendly software. Due to the fact that e-gold is a small fish in the financial pond, most of the fraud is presently involving credit cards. However, as e-gold increases in popularity, fraud will become more common. I suspect that one the hassle from the fraud reaches a certain threshhold, e-gold will upgrade to a more secure system. HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: security
Unfortunately, this is not quite accurate. All digital bearer instrument schemes require a central clearing mechanism to prevent double spending. This amounts to an account based system. Such systems can be PKI based and so are more secure than e-gold. But they, also, can be spoofed and hacked by sufficient effort. There is a major difference. A digital bearer instrument (DBI) itself an account however, as soon as it is spent, the account ceases to exist. Because the account is non-persistant, there is no account number and password to be hacked. Instead, the actual thing of value is the encrypted packet which resides on your hard drive, zip disk, or floppy. To steal it, the hacker has to copy it from your computer AND get your private key AND password. Since it is rather simple to save your DBI'sand private keys on a floppy, CD, or ZIP Disk, and then take them out of the computer, you can have bullet-proof security. It is true that any scheme has weaknesses. However, by simply upgrading to a security scheme that is one or two magnitudes more diffucult to break, the amount of fraud should decrease by a similar degree. The harder it is to break, the smaller the pool of qualified thieves. :-) It may not be worth it to the average customer to upgrade to a smart-card system. But the average e-merchant loses anywhere from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year due to fraud. It might be worth investing that money into a smart-card incentive program. Far more people use credit cards than use password-only schemes like e-gold. Cards are publically accepted and easily marketable. All we need is universal card readers. HK CCS --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: frederick
There is a simple and highly effective way of defeating keyboard sniffers on a simple everyday internet browser interface. Unfortunately I am not keen to divulge the details because it is a feature of the new Pecunix interface currently under development. Yes, it is called a keypad on the screen where you click on the letters of the password with your mouse. The only problem is: if they can install a keyboard sniffer, they can install a mouse sniffer, java sniffer, or any other kind of sniffer. If you open a trojan attachment you can install programs with full access to the data stream that passes through your CPU. The only way to truly beat the problem is to store the private key on a dedicated secure device that does all the encryption itself, such as a smart card, or one of the new fangled cell phones. That way ALL the relevant data that passes through your computer is already encrypted and worthless to the hacker. That still leaves the possibility of man-in-the-middle attacks, but those are much harder to pull off. HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Metal Savings?
Does anyone know what happend to Metal Savings? What about Pay by Gold? HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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
Back to Paul Valhur's question: the reason that it does matter whether GSR invests in or allows fractional reserve schemes backed by e-gold is this: These fractional reserve schemes create money (digital bearer-held notes, or book-entry) using the denomination "grams of gold". This ethergold floating around out there under the name of gold increases the supply of "gold" relative to other goods and services. This causes the value of all gold to slightly drop in purchasing power, specifically digital gold currencies. While e-gold is not at corporate risk due to fractional reserve schemes that use e-gold; e-gold, GoldMoney and all other "grams of gold" currencies will lose purchasing power as a result of these schemes that issue ether-gold and call it "grams of gold". That is a type of risk. And, as Claude pointed out, all it takes is one fractional reserve company suffering a run and folding to generate inaccurate media reports that will equate e-gold with the failed currency. The reputation damage could also harm the purchasing power of e-gold, so that is also a risk. As long as all the notes you have issued add up to the amount of backing you have in the vault, there isn't a problem. Or if the fractional reserve schemes did not call their notes "grams of gold" the problem could also be avoided. HK On 18 Apr 2001, at 10:28, James M. Ray wrote: and risks taken by GSR *DO* *NOT* risk *ANY* of the metal that's owned by account holders! On that, I agree. Claude http://www.goldcurrencies.ca http://www.ormetal.com == Claude Cormier Public Key http://www.ormetal.com/PGPkey.html == Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] e-gold reserve down?
I just noticed on the e-gold examiner that the total reserve is at 43,600. Last month it was up to 46,000. That's a 5% drop. Any guess as to why? Negative publicity from the SS raid on Parker Bradley? HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Internet Ethics?
It is a subtle form of theft. It breaks the command "thou shalt not steal" which is fundamental to the success of a free-market economy. There is no such commandment neccesary. The free-market economy is capitalism with instant communication via the net and without government intervention, right? Anybody who acts deceitfully will not be dealt with anymore. Reputation is your most valuable commodity in a free-market economy. Capitalism succeeds because it is based upon one of humanity's greatest failings... Greed. However, without sufficient communication, capitalism can burn itself out because there are no feedback mechanisms. This is why we have had government intervention. The government institutes law after law to regulate Capitalism into some sort of Socialism. Socialism would be a great system to live under, however it doesn't take into account the one thing that Capitalism does; Greed. However, now, with the instant world-wide communication provided by the internet, the feedback mechanisms are now beginning to exist. Anybody who doesn't ensure the purity of their product and passes it off as so will not be in business for long. If there is no government intervention, an added responsibility is needed. "Caveat Emptor" becomes completely true again. This opens up a very interesting question. Can an effective global free-market economy exist without state coercion to punish thieves and frauds? Can a free-market effectively operate when there is no common ethical standard governing the personal actions of the participants? The HYIP scammers discussed on this list have been quick to volunteer to provide a test case. All fraud is based on abused trust. Fraud cannot happen unless one person trusted the word, contract, or signature of another person. Since all internet transactions by definition require trust, scammers are able to pretend to be trustworthy in order to gain the money of another person by promising something in return. They then break their word and escape (theoretically) with the money. The scammer has an economic incentive to commit fraud. 1. There are millions of new suckers born every minute. 2. Due to the fact that the Internet has so MUCH information that individuals cannot possibly absorb it all, fraudsters will always be able to find new ignorant victims. 3. The victim learns "caveat emptor" at his own expense.The scammer is financially rewarded for teaching the victim this lesson. 4. It is very easy to create a new "identity" on the internet in order to get around the loss of trust problem. Trust is required in order for a free-market to work. As long as states are ineffective in raising the cost of fraud, scammers will continue to use the internet to rip people off. This will gradually undermine the free-market because 1. It will erode trust all around. 2. It reduces the efficiency of the market by raising transaction cost. If a large portion of the population really believes the ethic put forward that "Greed is good" then more and more people will resort to fraud, because after all, they are helping to educate suckers, and they are advancing themselves financially, and there will always be new suckers to educate, so there isn't much reason not to rip people off. The scam artist is really a benefactor to society, right? There are only two things that can keep the free-market working: fear of temporal consquences and fear of eternal consequences. In other words, the fear of the State and fear of God. The state has never been efficient in punishing thieves and never will be. The widespread fear of God is what allowed Western Civilization to arise because it created a society with a common ethical standard. (In London in the late 1600's pickpocketing was punished by hanging. However, it was so hard to catch pickpockets that many people had their pockets picked whilst standing in the crowd watching the execution of pickpockets. Even fear of death is not sufficient to prevent it, unless the state can catch the perp the majority of the time. It never will be that efficient.)Since the state has never been very effective at punishing thievery, fear of eternal retribution has generally been the basis of morality that has allowed civilization to exist. The free-market only works when the majority of the population has the self-governance to abstain from lying and stealing. If the morality of the MAJORITY of society dissolves, making it highly likely that you can't trust anyone's word, then the free-market fails. HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Interesting Article Comparing E-gold, Standard Reserve, GoldMoney
Interesting article: http://www.goldeconomy.com/compare.htm Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Yada yada yada
It's funny how every new gold currency company on the block touts themselves as revolutionizing global commerce by providing instantly-clearing currency transactions. This claim of having something new and earthshaking is made by Standard Reserve, GoldMoney, and Pecunix, to name three. But really, anybody with a database and a web-server can do that. All you have to do to do international transfers of value is get everyone to sign up on OUR system! It's funny that the companies thatmake this claim to be the first, weren't. E-gold beat them to it. The existence of these new companies DOES bring up the point that e-gold needs competition for its own good. Competition will force e-gold to provide even better services to stay number one. The gold currency market will be much stronger if there are a number of companies with a stake in it. But this brings up a problem. The more digital currencies that come on the market, the more fragmented the market will become. Merchants are not going to put multiple shopping carts on their web sites. The gold currency companies need to get together and come up with a system that allows one shopping cart to work for all the digital currencies. There is a system that would allow this. It is Vince Cate's SAXAS software. (The same software that Vince and Sean were arguing about the patents to last week.) No one wants to tie their company down to a proprietary software system like that either, though.We needa working group to form an API so that third party vendors, like Vince Cates, could create software to fit the specs. It would work the same way as HTML and browser companies. Anyone could make a financial transaction software that would meet the requirements of the API. This way we all have a choice. The gold currency companies need to realize that they would all benefit by doing this, even e-gold. Here's why: In a fragmented market, say of 500,000 users, e-gold might have 250,000 users, GoldMoney 40,000, Standard Reserve 50,000 and so on. Each currency is limited by this to its own niche market. By creating a system that allows all of these currencies to be compatible with each other all of the currencies now have a market of 500,000 and the users now have a selection of currencies. More choices give more freedom to the users. A larger market gives each currency provider a better opportunity to carve out a market niche. Everyone benefits. Of course, the largest currency provider, e-gold,has the least to gain from this; and the smallest new guys on the block, like Pecunix or GoldMoneygain the most. But the additional credibility that this type of market would lend to digital gold currencies would bolster consumer confidence and help to entice more merchants to switch over to gold currency. So even e-gold, the market leader, stands to benefit significantly and will get more business from this kind of arrangement. Any thoughts? HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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: Yada yada yada
George M of SR writes: "You are assuming there are only 500,000 potential users." The assumption was only for the purpose of illustration. It doesn't matter if there are 500,000 users, or 500,000,000 users. If all of the gold currencies are compatible with each other, they all have access to the total market. If they are not compatible, as is the case today, and each try to build their own global market, none of them will be as successful because the market will be fragmented. It's the same principle as the telephone or any other network. The utility of the network is directly propertional to the number of users on the network squared. If e-gold held half the market, and all of the competitors held the other half, by consolidating e-gold would double their available market. But the company would realize a fourfold increase (2 squared) in the utility of the total system to users. It doesn't matter who the market leader is, suppose Standard Reserve becomes number one. By making the currencies compatible with each other to the end users, the market leader will realize a tremendous increase in the worth of their service, as will everyone else in the market. George M of SR writes: "As of this writing, we have surpassed that number of committed accounts, and should have more than that in funded accounts before the year is out." George, I believe you. However, I do have a question. SR is 100% backed by e-gold right? So, if SR sells 40 thousand oz worth of Standard Gold, then e-gold's total reserve should rise by 40 thousand oz right? From October 2000 - December 2000 e-gold's reserve increased from 28,800 oz to 41,600 oz. That is a 12,800 oz increase (44%) over two months. From January 2001 - March 2001 the reserve increased by only 3,200 oz. (7% over two months). Standard Reserve launched the Instant Anywhere Card in January. If you have already sold 500,000 accounts, where is the money? "Bird in the hand worth two in the bush." HK - Original Message - From: "George Matyjewicz" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "e-gold Discussion" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 10:04 PM Subject: [e-gold-list] Re: Yada yada yada At 05:03 PM 3/29/2001 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The gold currency companies need to realize that they would all benefit by doing this, even e-gold. Here's why: In a fragmented market, say of 500,000 users, e-gold might have 250,000 users, GoldMoney 40,000, Standard Reserve 50,000 and so on. Each currency is limited by this to its own niche market. You are assuming there are only 500,000 potential users. As of this writing, we have surpassed that number of committed accounts, and should have more than that in funded accounts before the year is out. Keep in mind there is a VERY LARGE non-gold economy out there. Stay tuned for some upcoming announcements. George __ George Matyjewicz, President Standard Reserve Corp. -- Atlanta, GA World Wide Currency for the World Wide Web http://www.standardreserve.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Toronto Gold
Speaking of the safety of the gold, there's an article on the subject on goldeconomy. http://www.goldeconomy.com/arch2.htm Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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-list digest: March 16, 2001
I called Parker at his house and cell phone #'s but no one answers and there is no answering machine online. HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Parker
Parker's web site, www.gold-age.net is also offline. Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Two questions
1. Is there any market maker providing a convenient way to convert Standard Gold to e-gold? Standard Reserve conveniently allows e-gold spends into SR accounts but not vice versa. This is really annoying. 2. Does e-gold have any public stats over a longer time than 24 hours. How would one find out the monthly gold balances and velocity over the past three months? HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Mystery IP addresses
Did you do a reverse IP lookup on the mystery address? The Freedom Network alows users to surf anonymously and choose the freedom server from which their IP address will appear to originate. That is one possibility. www.freedom.net HK Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- 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-list digest: March 11, 2001
James Turk applied for his patents in 1993. E-gold began operation in 1996, so e-gold cannot claim prior art. I've read the patents and am unconvinced that there was any unique invention. He simply put together accounting, a computer, a network, and gold as the medium being accounted. But apparently the patent office thought it was unique enough to grant two patents. The patent is only valid inside the United States and any countries that have an agreement with the U.S. to honor U.S. patents. The patent could probably be overturned if challenged; but for now it does serve the useful purpose of preventing one of the giants like Chase-Manhattan or Citybank from patenting the idea and then shutting down e-gold with lawsuits. HK-Kid Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] James Turk Gold Money
There is an article by James Turk mentioning his patents on the front page of www.goldeconomy.com this week. Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
