[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]
