Slashdot Mirror


Bank Run in Second Life

Jamie found an interesting bit about a bank run in Second Life. The recent ban on gambling combined with a $12k theft from the 2L stock market has caused people to try to get their money back. The article mentions that this could supposedly affect 8.5M players even tho most estimates of actual hard core players in the system are in the 5 to low 6 figure range.

20 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. 2L? by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Funny

    What is this "2L" thing? It's not Second Life, because the whole friggin' world abbreviates that to "SL" and nobody is pedantic enough to come up with a totally new abbreviation when a perfectly good one already exists. So what does it mean?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:2L? by karnal · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm guessing it's somewhere between "L" and "XL".

      --
      Karnal
  2. Vast exaggeration by DaleGlass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ginko is a resident run bank, which has nothing really special about it. You can it on their own a href="https://ginkofinancial.com/">website: They only claim to have 18,875 accounts, quite a few of which probably were created as a test. Nowhere near the 8.5 million claimed.

    Ginko's problem was their insane interest rates, which IIRC varied somewhere between 100% and 30% per year. I think it was 70% for a quite long time. People accused it of being a Ponzi scheme, which given that enormous interest sounds likely. That's why I never put a cent in it :-)

    1. Re:Vast exaggeration by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful
      No, no. What they're saying is that banks like this (not just Ginko, there are others like it) will have an effect on the economy of the game. Think about it. If there were real banks doing this what effect would it have on the economy? Think 1930s America, because that's almost exactly what happened.

      The most interesting part of the article to me, though was this tidbit:

      Because the Linden dollar has no commodity backing, he says, the Second Life economy is in danger of crashing when provoked by any sufficient shock.


      Now, s/Linden dollar/U.S. dollar/ and s/Second Life/U.S./ and the sentence would still be correct. Go ahead, try it. Read it again. Because the U.S. dollar has no commodity backing...

    2. Re:Vast exaggeration by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Okay, I think I have some expertise on this, because I actually ran an SL "bank" (under a broad definition of "bank", but I called it a bank). I can tell you that 100% interest rate in SL is NOT "insane", and I can tell you how to "earn" that kind of interest without a Ponzi scheme.

      First, some background: (as of '03 when I played) in SL, they make it so that they "recharge" your money to a certain level each week, sort of like welfare. The day of the week varies between people. So, if you store your money with a trusted party, it will look like you're poor and you'll get money despite not being poor. I believe at the time it was something like LD 7000 that they would recharge you to. My bank served the function of the trusted party: I'd hold their money (through a script) over their recharge day.

      Oh, and yes, I was very open about this, and told admins I was doing it. They didn't care.

      Now, this doesn't explain how exactly you'd employ someone's money to make more money (like the banks claimed). However, it shows how, using some tricks, you can start with e.g. LD 7000, and "earn" 7000 more each week ... that's definitely more than a 100% yearly effective interest rate!

    3. Re:Vast exaggeration by Control+Group · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes and no. That's a subset of the reason. The larger reason is that it's illegal in general to demand payment in some other form of currency in preference to the US dollar. That's what the phrase "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private" means. It means that, if you're going to do business in the US, and if you're going to engage in a financial transaction, you may not refuse the US dollar as a currency to complete the transaction.

      It is not legal to require payment in pounds sterling, gold bars, or years of indentured servitude.

      Basically, the US dollar is worth anything because the government says it is...which is, ultimately, a function of the citizens of the US saying that it is. Which, ultimately, makes it no different than gold (except, of course, that the finite supply of gold is imposed by the universe, while the finite supply of dollars is imposed by the Fed).

      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    4. Re:Vast exaggeration by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 4, Informative

      Um. Nope. The US dollar is worth something because it has a limited supply.

      My snot has limited supply too, but it's not worth anything.

      The GP was right for the question he was answering: why do the unbacked, limited-supply US dollars have value? Among other things, because you can pay taxes with them. I would add further, that so many debts are denominated in US dollars. This cascades into a sort of network effect: X people accept dollars, because they can pay debts with them, so MOST people accept dollars because they will be buying from someone, somehow connected to those X people.

      And no, debt in and of it self is not morally objectionable. There's nothing wrong with businesses taking out loans for productive purposes for example. The reason a lot of economists like currency based this way is that you don't have to hold productive commodites (like gold, which can be used for hi-tech equipment) out of production, just so it can be used as money.

      Your point about government inflating the currency is well-taken, but you're exaggerating its impact. As long as people know the approximate range by which it will expand the money supply, they will demand an interest rate on their lending that eliminates this effect. It's only the *ununsually excessive* expansions that can have distortionary effects, and people's expectations are pretty well adapted based on history.

    5. Re:Vast exaggeration by Colin+Smith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My snot has limited supply too, but it's not worth anything. Your snot is just one among billions. There's a plentiful supply. Dollars have a value because the supply is limited, if there was an infinite supply, nobody including the government would accept them as a form of payment for anything, including taxes. Try printing them off yourself and see what happens.

      The reason a lot of economists like currency based this way is that you don't have to hold productive commodites (like gold, which can be used for hi-tech equipment) out of production, just so it can be used as money. It doesn't have to be debt though. Look I agree debts can be useful, but there's no particular reason that money has to be based on it, or even on gold. Money is a valuable commodity of it's own, really that's how people think of it anyway. The only problem with unbacked currency is the government's propensity to roll the presses 24 hours per day, seven days per week, 52 weeks of the year.

      e.g. http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1595

      but you're exaggerating its impact The fractional reserve system multiplies the impact, and... Really, take a look at the effect of exponentially increasing debt on the economy, society, on the environment. Look at who gets the cash and who gets the poverty.

      As long as people know the approximate range by which it will expand the money supply, they will demand an interest rate on their lending that eliminates this effect. Fine if you're in a position to buy government bonds. For the rest of humanity though? The waitress waiting tables for minimum wage.
      --
      Deleted
    6. Re:Vast exaggeration by Dragonslicer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ginko also isn't a "bank" in the usual term of the word; it's not regulated or insured in any way and isn't impacted by any of the legal requirements of real world financial institutions. Quite frankly; you're an idiot if you trust them with your money. So they're the Second Life version of PayPal?
    7. Re:Vast exaggeration by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Might as well put it in the lottery. If they're returning 100% interest, then someone is getting screwed somewhere.

      Banks make money through investing in other people's projects, and by loaning money for interest. Like everything else, it's a diminishing return, so you can't loan money at an equal rate to the interest rate you're giving your depositors, so either they're loaning your money to people at an interest rate that is higher than 100%, with no possible way to collect on a bad debt.

      Chances are they were using that money to finance one of the now-illegal casino's, which would make sense, as that's about the only way to make money in SL that would actually require an input of cash. Now that they've tanked there is basically no longer any point in a bank that actually pays interest. There is nowhere for the money to come from.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  3. People are idiots by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If this sort of thing affects your finances in any major way, you're a moron for "investing" your money in a game. Just because Linden Labs decided to publish an exchange rate for their dollars and real dollars doesn't mean their dollars are a good investment vehicle. Their economy is completely unregulated, and their "banks" are run by anonymous people in foreign countries well outside the reach of US laws (the guy they interviewed is in Brazil, for example).

    You might as well call playing the slots in Vegas a retirement plan, it's probably less risky.

  4. tho? by CompMD · · Score: 5, Funny

    Every time you use "tho" in place of the actual word "though," God kills a kitten.

  5. Obl. Quote by Rixel · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're thinking of this place all wrong. As if I had the money back in a safe. The money's not here. Your money's in Joe's imaginary house...right next to yours. And in the imaginary Kennedy house, and Mrs. Macklin's imaginary house, and a hundred other imaginary houses. Why, you're lending them the money to build, and then, they're going to pay it back to you as best they can. Now what are you going to do? Foreclose on them?...Now wait...now listen...now listen to me. I beg of you not to do this thing. If Potter gets hold of this Virtual Building and Loan there'll never be another decent imaginary house built in this imaginary town. He's already got charge of the imaginary bank. He's got the imaginary bus line. He's got the imaginary department stores. And now he's after us. Why? Well, it's very simple. Because we're cutting in on his business, that's why. And because he wants to keep you living in his imaginary slums and paying the kind of rent he decides. Joe, you lived in one of his imaginary houses, didn't you? Well, have you forgotten? Have you forgotten what he charged you for that imaginary broken-down shack? Here, Ed. You know, you remember last year when things weren't going so well, and you couldn't make your payments. You didn't lose your imaginary house, did you? Do you think Potter would have let you keep it? Can't you understand what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why? Because we're panicky and he's not. That's why. He's picking up some bargains. Now, we can get through this thing all right. We've got to stick together, though. We've got to have faith in each other.

    --
    Never play chicken with a passive aggressive.
  6. Re:Looking for a decent exchange rate by utopianfiat · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd be alright if I could get a decent exchange rate for all these US Dollars...


    FIXED.
    --
    +5, Truth
  7. Re:You don't think debt is a commodity? by Control+Group · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, debt is a commodity of sorts, I suppose. But debt, like Linden dollars, is still virtual, right? If not, post a link to a picture of debt. Point is, there's no physical commodity backing dollars at all. It used to be back by gold, but it's not anymore.

    That's a bit disingenuous - I challenge to post a link to a picture of "value." The very notion of value is virtual, since the universe certainly doesn't care whether there's gold in them thar hills.

    And don't fall into the trap of thinking that gold is somehow magical in its ability to have value. Gold is only valuable because people say it is, just like the US dollar. The only difference is that the scarcity of gold is based on physics and the relative difficulty of building a supercollider, while the scarcity of US dollars is based on the desire of the US to have a functioning economy.

    If you don't believe me, think about how you'd value the following if modern civilization were to collapse - potable water, food, matches, ammunition, tobacco, liquor, coffee, paper, gold. Now imagine everyone else thinking the same thing (because civilization has collapsed).
    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
  8. Could be worse... by n+dot+l · · Score: 5, Funny

    Could be "Girl builds computer in online game while online boyfriend watches. Look, he has screen shots."

  9. Fiat currencies have several problems. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The gold standard is ridiculous and archaic It ended in 1971 after a thousand years of use. Neither ridiculous nor particularly archaic.

    There's nothing wrong with fiat currency. It decreases in value every year destroying the value of savings.

    It allows the government the ability to pay for anything it likes which leads to the inevitable increases in power of the political elite, the banks and the largest multinational corporations which service government interests.

    It requires an exponentially increasing economy and debt burden just to maintain the status quo and make interest payments. This has a devastating effect on the environment and human being's work/life balance.

    Those are just off the top of my head. There are more disadvantages.

    The currency shapes our society.
    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Fiat currencies have several problems. by Shelrem · · Score: 5, Informative

      The gold standard is terrible, leads to recessions, and in general unnecessarily constrains the economy. Here's a hint: if you think money is generally created by printing more currency, you obviously don't know what the hell you're talking about. Even if you understand how money is created, you still may not. For a thorough debunking of the gold standard, read this: http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/goldbug.html

      For an introduction on how money is created, try this: http://ingrimayne.com/econ/Banking/Commodity2.html

    2. Re:Fiat currencies have several problems. by Mr.+Bad+Example · · Score: 4, Funny

      > Here's a hint: if you think money is generally created by printing more currency,
      > you obviously don't know what the hell you're talking about.

      Wait...wh-? Seriously?

      Oh, shit. Excuse me--I have to call Kinko's and cancel an order right now.

  10. Re:Looking for a decent exchange rate by Psion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a real problem. Plenty of vendors sell the unauthorized work of others. In the case of one "artist", I found images just last night that I recognized from another, real world source, signed on each image by the vendor; the clearest example of IP "theft" I can think of, and certainly a lot more flagrant than any music sharing that pisses off RIAA so much. But I don't think it's that big of an issue. This kind of copyright infringement is rampant throughout the Internet. Look at the content of YouTube, for example. And at the same time this is going on, there are genuine, original artists to be found both in Second Life, and YouTube. To some extent, I see this as an example of the marginal value of both venues for creative expression. There aren't enough people in either environment for plagiarists to be recognized for what they are yet. Additionally, there's a tolerance on the internet for copyright infringement ... in part because organizations like RIAA and MPAA have made pests of themselves and created a "fuck you" attitude towards IP, and also in part because people in general tend to be lazy and inconsiderate of the work of others.