Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Schmidt: Google Once Considered Issuing Currency

Posted by Soulskill on from the not-willing-to-nationalize-the-us-government-yet dept.

itwbennett writes "In his keynote speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said the company once 'had various proposals to have [its] own currency [it was] going to call Google Bucks.' The idea was to implement a 'peer-to-peer money' system, but it was squelched by legal issues."

12 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Digital Rothschilds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Give me controll of a nation's money supply and i care who not sets its laws...."
    -Mayer Amschel Rothschild

    Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.

    1. Re:Digital Rothschilds by sg_oneill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's one for you. Opt in citizenship to a nationless, territory free country.

      Awesome, two sets of laws to follow instead of one! Why just the other day I was thinking "Shit , you know what I dont have enough of in my life? Laws!"

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    2. Re:Digital Rothschilds by Luckyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why? If people feel that they can get arbitrage which suits their beliefs better then government's system, and all parties agree to such arbitrage, and such arbitrage is fully compliant with the existing laws, why is it scary?

      I'll assume this was just a bad case of sarcasm malfunction on my part.

    3. Re:Digital Rothschilds by Corbets · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.

      I'm guessing you meant voracity - but their habitual truthfulness in leadership may also be unsurprising, I don't know.

    4. Re:Digital Rothschilds by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sounds like what you need is a good Home Owner's Association!

      That's like living in the "People's Republic of Suburbia", complete with central committee (HOA board), secret police (rent-a-cops), and informants (nosy neighbors).

    5. Re:Digital Rothschilds by Ash+Vince · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People don't freak out about arbitration, they freak out about the sharia. You know because they stone people and hate women and stuff and think it's ok because the sharia demands it.

      If two muslims get some sort of sharia judgement in the UK that involves stoning someone to death, they are most likely both going to prison for a very long time unless they dispose of the corpse nice and quietly and nobody else finds out.

      As a brit I have no problems with a couple of Muslims settling their differences outside court by whatever means the like. Just don't expect me to be bound by that shit for a second.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    6. Re:Digital Rothschilds by w_dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really it's the people who control the police, courts, and military. If all of the above can be bribed then yes, the bankers will run the country. If they can't then the lawmakers run the country. If they are all made up of citizens who don't feel they are above their own laws then the citizens run the country. Generally it's some mix, different countries have different balances of power based on who is capable of being above the law.

  2. Re:For the love of God... by mosb1000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, as opposed to "real" money, which is different in some meaningfull way, I assure you!

  3. Re:This company scares me more and more by Mouldy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Then I guess that includes small indie games that have in-game currency or use Facebook credits (which are bought for real world money) should also be shut down. Or casinos that use chips rather than letting you bet at the tables with real money?

    Point is, companies have had their own currencies for years. While some people might disagree with those practises - company-specific currency isn't intrinsically bad

  4. Re:This company scares me more and more by repapetilto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?

  5. Re:This company scares me more and more by basecastula+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?

    Because you can exchange it for goods that don't originate from said company. Much like cash as opposed to a gift card.

  6. Re:Ripple Monetary System by u38cg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, what's your alternative? Money laundering prevention is one of the simplest and most effective crime fighting tools around, as annoying as it may be.

    --
    [FUCK BETA]