Financial Anonymity and Privacy with DMT?

An anonymous reader asks: "I'll have to quote a fellow cypherpunk to give my question the correct framing: '...this is a time when the world needs these services more than ever. In crises there is a tendency for repressive governments to crack down on communications and free access to information. Lately the fear of terrorism has eroded many rights we took for granted. One of those rights, financial privacy and anonymity is disappearing fast, as the US takes steps to stop the movement of terrorist funds. There is a system out there that might help slow the erosion of rights: DMT. Might it be a solution to the erosion of financial privacy and anonymity?"

"DMT was launched a few years back:

'The Digital Monetary Trust is a computer system and mechanism that gives users the ability to hold assets anonymously, along with the ability to anonymously transfer these assets to other parties. You can think of a DMT customer account as an anonymously-held checking account (in which the customer is anonymous both to the bank and to other people), but one which allows the customer to write checks to third parties (and these third parties will also be anonymous to the bank and the outside world; in fact, you can even arrange for the receiver of your check to be anonymous to you also).'

Since then there has been very little public discussion about its security, anonymity, and use.

Has anyone used this system, or know of organizations that do? What magnitude of money flows in and out, and are there enough users to afford decent anonymity?"

Comments

Contridiction

[Rick the Red]

This will never catch on until it has the full backing and trust of the government, but since it allows total anonimity the government (any government) will never back it.

What good is it if your assets are locked into a system that can lose them without recourse? Who do you sue if the system wipes out your account? If people can't turn to the government for help in such situations, they won't use it. The government doesn't want people to use it, so they won't help. Hell, PayPal is only quasi-legal and on the edge of being shut down as it is -- what makes you think the government is going to allow DMT?

Re:Contridiction

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. No govt trust is necessary. There is definite risk with using such a system, as you have little recourse if they ran off with your money. However, many people would be willing to take such a risk for the benefit of anonymity. You can also bank on the fact that these people make their money from transaction fees, and will not want to break the trust of their clients.

No govt needs to *allow* DMT to exist. It is a decentralized system that exists outside of any one nation. It has banking ties to many, as money needs to be transfered in and out. These ties aren't counted on for anonymity, as they are part of the traditional SWIFT system, which is watched like a hawk. Anonymity comes from transactions inside the system.

Since DMT hasn't been shut down in the US, I'm assuming the US tolerates it. No country has, to my knowledge, outlawed DMT.

Swiss Banks - not anymore

[bluGill]

Last I heard the swiss have started bowing to pressure and reporting to your government what you have. I suppose a lot of money could still buy them off, but for most of us swiss banks no longer shield your money from your governement.

There are a few countries that do still shield your money, but they are not as stable as the Swiss. Half of what the swiss give you is a bank that as been around for a few hundred years and plans to remain open for a few hundred more. (they do however go out of buissness once in a while, I'm not sure what protection you have)