I have. They mint a currency called mod points, which they currently give away! I can assure everyone here that if you're minting a currency, it's far better for your bottom-line if you SELL it. (I have a ten gram reward out there for the first person to hack the Slashcode so that site owners can sell mod points for e-gold, so yes, I have venal-profit-making motives for this post, but I also think it would be a cool thing for minor sites like Fairtunes and others to do. Besides, I've occasionally wanted mod points enough to pay for them, so why not sell me what I want?)
Anyway, one of the few companies that actually might make profit would be google. It's so unbelievably cool that I'd be happy to pay a few bucks a month just to use it.
I totally agree with you on this. What google might try could be an e-gold tipjar (there I go again, more venal-profit-making motives). They could accept e-gold, PayPal, and anything else they think they could sell, and many of us would give them tips because we like their service better than the other search engines. This (e-gold tipjars) can also be a solution to the "Napster problem," IMO, since if you listen to Courtney Love and other musicians, they get far less than a buck for a $15 CD.
No, I can't guarantee everyone would tip (same as the local diner in that respect) but many folks would, just to keep the musician happy, and if the average tip were a buck's worth of gold, she would not have to get a tip from everyone to do better than the RIAA does for her! IMO.
As usual, any slashdotter is free to contact me and get a bit of e-gold to play around with, just for the asking. Thanks for listening.
JMR
I used to try to get Amazon to accept e-gold (it's my job) along with plastic. I and a few others actually got to the middle-management layer, and managed to occasionally converse with Amazon management. What I discovered was an incredible quantity of pointy-haired attitude. There was a willingness to type out long emails telling why they didn't want to think about accepting a payment system alternative which they could later sell for a profit (or at least lose less on than they lose in plastic fees) but a complete UN-willingness to spend the five minutes it takes to try e-gold, despite my pleas.
Then one day, things changed. http://www.bananagold.com/ appeared and I vowed never to e-mail Amazon again, and then http://www.metalproxy.com/ happened quickly afterwards. Now I can buy anything I want at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or Thinkgeek. It turns out that programmer-fans of e-gold want it at spot even if major, "mainstream" merchants don't. A good thing for me, and a good example to money-losing companies like Amazon of what they're missing by talking instead of DO-ing. Amazon, instead of accepting my currency, ended up giving me $150 worth of merchandise for switching phone companies for a month. I never gave them a credit card number, and I'll never have to now!:)
JMR
I speak for myself, as usual, and obviously Amazon is glad I've never been a shareholder.:)
(When did we ever have one of those? But I digress...)
In my opinion, government has become MORE corrupt since the passage of speech-limitation (go run for anything from dog-catcher to president and then tell me money isn't needed for political speech, I just wanna maybe know WHO gave to or bought your ass!) laws passed in the Watergate aftermath. Now that those laws have failed totally, there's a hankering for even MORE laws limiting political speech. These laws are called "reform" uniformly by the "mainstream" media, as their biases and friends would gain in power if people like me are silenced.
Meanwhile, media bigwigs and people like Barbra Streisand would/will continue to exercise incredible influence over elections, and their influence would only increase with these "reforms" that limit my right to waste my money if I damn-well want to waste it! As it is, if you want to waste lots of money on politics you have to be either (loser) Michael Huffington-rich or (winner, the bankers she borrowed from are probably gonna be losers, though) Maria Cantwell-rich to do it. I'm not cut out for political office and I have a job I like, but I feel I should be able to spend money on the speech I want to spend it on without limits except (maybe) saying who I gave it to. The left hems and haws, but they disagree in the end, whilst somehow retaining the "free speech" mantle! I don't see how, since my speech is less-and-less free...
Campaign finance "reform" is the same kind of Newspeak we see when we see pro-big- government "anarchists" (who are anything but anarchists!) protesting against "free trade" (which is obviously also anything-but free trade or it would not take so goddam many lawyers to describe it!). These word-thefts PISS ME OFF! The "mainstream" media must STOP letting participants in debates redefine terms! "Another law" or as I'd put it "yet-another law" is NOT the same thing as "reform" -- and I'm tired of being painted as "against reform" just because I have a different idea of how to proceed!
BTW, I'm a small-L libertarian in Florida who voted for Dave Barry as a protest message, and I don't give a crap if you either flame me or mod me down, so do your worst! I'm right.:)
JMR
Speaking ONLY for myself, as always. Nobody else (especially my employer) wants my opinion anyway!
Err, they get a free watch. Personally, I haven't worn a watch for the last six months, as a total of three other devices which are always on me have intergrated clocks.
I agree (and besides, watches give me that strange tan-line on my wrist so I haven't worn one for years)! Putting on my most-Orwellian hat, though, the device they probably want to begin 'harnessing' (in exchange for free airtime?) is going to be the cellphone. Mine is with me most of the time (not quite as connected to me as a watch would be -- so no heartbeat, but usually in the same room or car). The phone, of course, would have the ability to transmit responses in real-time. ["Leno, that last joke kinda sucked, but the average geek laughed pretty-hard at the one before!"]
Opinions, as always, are my own, and just because I described something doesn't mean I'm advocating it -- for example, my price for the above kind of invasion of privacy would probably be repellant to even the richest companies. Even though I could see the personal uses of bugging myself that you mentioned, bugging in my state (Florida) is a felony (unless you're a well-connected teacher's union political-hack, recording someone else's telephone conversation for later sale to opposing politicians, in which case you get off with a slap on the wrist). Ok, enough ranting...
JMR
Also, according to a recent California ruling, juries aren't allowed to use their consciences anymore and judge the law. The reason we have (the few remaining shreds of) free speech and freedom of worship is that juries in England and America judged laws against Quaker worship and truthful criticism of government officials as wrong.
The reason there's no Fugitive Slave Act, and the Salem Witch trials failed, and there's no alcohol prohibition all stems from the leadership of the common man -- juries. Not politicians, not 'leaders,' ordinary people like you and me. Unfortunately, judges like to lie about jury power and say that juries DON'T have the rights explained much better than I have at http://www.fija.org/. It's very sad for me and for the future of respect for the law when judges lie, the lie is corrosive and affects far more than one case or thing (although obviously the main target is to continue funding for the tax and spend war on some drugs, if you ask me).
JMR
Speaks ONLY for himself!!! Especially in this message!
(Blatantly-self-interested message follows, mod down at will.)
One has to have a WAY to pay with micropayments. Aside from e-gold (everyone who knows me knew THAT was coming!) there's ecoin, whose site is apparently down right now, but they show a lot of promise for simplicity compared to DigiGold, even though there's even less of an exchange market just yet.
IMNSHO, YMMV, etc. Contact me if you wish to try e-gold. Thanks.
JMR
Re:Mod this up and WIN A MILLION!
on
RFC for Spammers
·
· Score: 1
At the risk of being modded down into oblivion, I'll say a couple of things here.
First, I've already mentioned this idea, as I think mod points are an ideal thing for owners of slashcode sites (if not Slashdot) to sell. Selling banner ads has not been the road to profitability for sites like Yahoo, and it's unlikely to work for/. either (I'm sure not buyin' one at today's rates!). Yes, I'm self-interested here, and a venal greedy-capitalist, etc. so mod me down if you like.
Second, there is a way with --or two -- using e-gold to do paid-email with pushed payments using a superior (and fun to play with!) currency. My usual offer to/. readers still stands, if you want a little of the filthy yellow metal to play with, contact me. Hopefully my email will finally start working again (has nothing to do with this message, my ISP is experiencing problems due to the Earthlink-borg taking them over clumsily). Thanks for listening.
JMR
I'd like to see a version where users can (warning, you're now entering Quark's! Buyer beware) purchase moderator points. I think that mod points are a form of quickly-expiring currency, and since I spend all day selling (or giving away) a currency based on the filthy yellow metal, I'd like to see an exchange market.
Will this lead to abuse, be imperfect, "censor" the poor, and cause other problems I'm not smart enough to foresee? Yes. I'll admit that. But OTOH the current system of randomly? assigning mod points is sometimes abused, is imperfect, awards NO points to those too poor to be around computers, and probably causes other problems too -- without making a profit for Andover.net.
I don't particularly care about Andover.net, actually (to see my attitude change 180 degrees, give me some shares) but it would be nice if sites like Fairtunes.com could sell something virtual for my currency (or others). If someone wants to do this and needs a bit of gold to play with, you need only contact me.
Thanks, very interesting. (Hmmm. Now I'm wondering if Haliburton's more into the nuclear power business than Occidental?)
When I was looking into solar power several years ago, I was surprised by the level of oil company investment. I just wish the oil companies weren't so incredibly-scared of methanol derived from hemp -- but that's a whole 'nother thread (flamefest?). Since ethanol has the corn/farm lobby, it's pretty firmly politically-entrenched, despite being provably less-efficient. One would think that those who harp on the free market would let the market work in this case (or in the case of my Cuban cigars -- sigh). Oh well, back to work now.
JMR
Think about the "mind" of this particular hive. I know some intelligent AOLusers, but frankly most AOLers don't fall in the "intelligent" category. When something is "so easy to use, no wonder it's #1," can anyone trust the majority of THOSE customers to make a decision? I'd be wary of decisions made by the average NON-AOL customer (or the average federal judge...) too, but this idea seems to be too much democracy to swallow. Just MHO.
JMR
Well said. This is why I say that Republicans are right for the wrong reason about SDI ("Star Wars") missile defense. The truth is, if I were (insert bad guy with a nuke) I'd NOT want to shoot the still armed-to-the-teeth with nukes USA with a missile. Missiles leave trails back to me, and I'd like to survive to be a dictator tomorrow if I can.
I'd use diplomatic pouches (sorry Customs! Can't search this!) to bring in the components needed for a car-trunk nuke, or just smuggle them in -- perhaps with some coke! It always amazes me that people think these guys will box by Marquis of Queensbury rules instead of punching for the balls without gloves, but the fact is that missiles aren't the dangerous part, it's WARHEADS. Warheads are small (and getting smaller) and missiles are delivery systems only, just like rental-cars or freighters. In all my scenarios where I'm the bad guy, Washington DC ALWAYS becomes a few square miles of glass as fancy-schmancy "Brilliant Pebbles" orbit above, impotent. (This subject & line of argument makes me very unpopular in debates, needless to say, because I'm so obviously-right! Kinda like debating the tax-&-spend war on (some) drugs, it's easier to avoid me than to face me.)
Anyway, with proper sensing technology, properly-far-out in space, an intercept can veer an asteroid off-course and prevent humans from becoming dinosaur-extinct, IF! we can get over the idea of having weapons (probably nukes, but possibly others if they have sufficient kinetic energy) in space. I don't like the idea, either, but it's the only useful thing the military industrial complex can do (and they and the politicians they own are determined to spend my money). There was even an early (James T. Kirk era) Star Trek episode about this subject, only they used a (less realistic, IMO) ground based directed energy weapon to divert the big rock.
JMR
I like Fairtunes a lot (they take e-gold!) but to be successful (IMO) any give-a-tip system would have to be right there on the Napster application, staring the person in the face. I'd agree that this is less likely since Napster has sold (out?) to Bertelsman(sp?), so when I say "Napster," please think "whatever file-sharing program ends up being dominant." From what I've seen, there's space for an e-gold account number on the Napster application, and I think that Napster would benefit as a company (and in a legal/PR sense) by encouraging this, though I doubt it's in the interest of Bertelsman(sp?).
I didn't mean Napster users listened to crap, I just meant that folks won't tip for it, and won't any longer have to buy it or have it in their homes, and ultimately I think this will affect music in a positive way. I'd like to store ONLY songs I like, and not store any that I dislike. Before that was impossible, and now it's possible (and easy). Sorry if I was unclear.
I don't think that asking for tips is "catering to freeloaders," and I think the other person's response covers this aspect pretty well. Ultimately, with the present versions of file sharing software, it's very hard NOT to be a "freeloader" and get any use out of the product, right?
I'm sorry if you dislike my analogy, but when I think about it, with cash and in a diner I'll probably never eat in again I'm a LOT more anonymous than when I make an e-gold spend, and the recipient can see at least my account name & number. e-gold isn't anonymous cash (Mr. Greenspan prints that stuff, on nice greenish paper, and it USED to be backed with the filthy yellow metal). I tend to make my tips as anonymous as possible, putting them under something so that the intended recipient will be the one to find and get them.
As for my! heart being in the right place, thanks, but actually I'm an incredibly-greedy anarcho-capitalist evil "heartless" libertarian type of guy, and I try to make it clear that many of my posts* are self-interested. I benefit if/when more people (especially artists and programmers!) use e-gold, so I hang around here for that reason; and in order not to be TOO much of a pain in the ass, I offer to click/. readers a bit of e-gold to play with, if they send me an account number.
JMR
* I've even said that someone should hack the Slashcode so that site-owners can sell moderator points (this may or may-not be a good idea, but I think on balance it's good, and it's definitely good for ME!:) I'd be very happy if someone here did this, I haven't the skill. Thanks.
If major artists get about 25 cents from the sale of a fifteen dollar CD, they should try to migrate to a tips-for-what-you-like model, as suggested by Courtney Love, among others. As seller of a payment system that allows efficient, instant, international micro (or macro) payments, I'm of course self-interested when I say this, but it goes beyond that, and I don't care if they also use competing payment systems. The important thing is to keep the RIAA from filtering out the lion's share for -- as Ms. Love so eloquently puts it -- trips to Scores (a famous NYC stripper bar, for those who don't know).
This idea at first sounds bad for the RIAA, and it is, but it's a double-edged sword. Musicians are gonna have to get used to only being paid for good work. Packaging three (or fewer!) good songs among 12 shitty ones is NOT going to fly anymore. We won't pay. OTOH, a tipjar on the website asking for very-little e-gold might well pay more than selling the same number of CDs as free-downloads given away.
Of course, bad people will not give anything, but ask yourself what you do in an unfamiliar city at a place you'll never eat in again when tipping-time comes. I leave a tip if the service was halfway decent -- and a really-nice tip if it was great. I don't do it for the recipient, I do it for ME (I once worked for tips, that makes a difference I've found). Anyway, I'm still working to get folks to see that e-gold is a solution to the Napster "problem." It's been slow, as more folks want to argue (at least, that was my experience at CFP99) and shout than think about a new way of paying or being paid for what we want online.
JMR
Why has this bothered me since the US electorate swallowed a "drug czar" hook, line, and sinker instead of just getting the government out of the tax and spend war on (some) drugs.
Now, nobody seems bothered by yet-another 'czar,' but didn't the Russians even get rid of their czars (not saying they installed anything different/better, just making a point because this crap still bothers me).
JMR
Marc Stiegler's fine book, Earthweb, but unless the users can understand written English (or I'm missing something, which is quite possible) I'm not sure how much it will do "for the billions of people who have yet to set foot in the wired wards of the Global Village."
OTOH, like it or not, English literacy seems to be growing rapidly, and perhaps that fact -- combined with services like Babelfish (if there's a Babelfish lite?) -- means my skepticism is not justified. I hope so.
JMR
To find one, it's best to look at what the "mainstream" news media ignores if they can (and screws up the story when they can't) or perhaps look to companies that never even had an IPO and still have some dude yammering on about old-fashioned stuff like economic fundamentals, and bragging about being in the black while keeping the promises others made about the internet.
JMR
What I love about this is that some brilliant moderator has managed to mark it "redundant." Folks, keep in mind, this is comment number 6! I don't know if it's an attempt at humor (I can almost see the thought-process now, "I'll mark the first comments in the redundancy story redundant! That'll show 'em!") or mere/. mod-point induced cluelessness (my money's on that one, of course) but since moderations of "redundant" can't be metamoderated, I felt the need to make this totally-off-topic comment. Seriously, folks, when you have mod points, try to browse at a deliberately-lower level and take some time actually reading/thinking, eh?
(Go ahead, mod me down for spouting off like this, see if I give a rat's ass.)
JMR
Hi David, glad to see you're better now (or at least posting).
I disagree (reluctantly, I get to see the mayhem that some "average users" manage to inflict upon themselves every working day) that users won't understand -- and indeed WANT -- moderation. Indeed, I think that moderator-points on/. are what could be termed a quickly-expiring online "currency," although with limited value due to the lack of an exchange marketplace and I'm not sure the word currency is right in this case (hence the quotes).
Everyone here has probably seen a comment that they'd like to mod up (or down, I guess) and not had any points to do so. I'm not proposing this for Slashdot itself (I'm not against it, either) but it might be nice if the "SlashCode" were modified so that mod points could actually be purchased, if a site owner chose to sell them. Obviously, I stand to gain from widespread adoption of one currency in particular (which seems ideally suited for the job, IMO) but I'd of course want to let all flowers bloom if this happens.
I don't write code, and I have no idea how hard this would be to do. The sites I've seen operating the Slashcode (Cluebot and Fairtunes) seem not to have user-moderation enabled at all, so I'm not sure that's an option in the publicly available version. I think that if average users more-quickly (well, ok, slowly) saw reputation as a valuable thing -- one that should be guarded and handled with care, the 'net might benefit. I agree that it won't be an easy job trying to teach them, but in the end it might be worth it -- even for others besides greedy-old Jim Ray.:)
Of course, for those who don't know me, I'm tremendously self-interested and biased. I'm also ready to admit that "moderation-for-the-rich" might not improve some sites, but I'm not convinced that it's never "worth it" to sell mod points. For example, I'd have paid half a gram or so to moderate this comment up this morning. I could not, so I didn't, but look at the comment and see if that would have been a good thing for yourself. The green-eyeshades types at Andover.net just *might* want to look into how many clickthrus that single transaction would equal...Or maybe not, I don't know.
JMR
Yup. Says "previously-scheduled downtime." Check the site, we do that every once in a while...or you might just get interested in the actual issue? Whatever...
JMR
I'd mod you up another point. The good thing about Slashdot is that -- unlike Fight Censorship and some other places where the overly-political like Jamie can try to cram crap down our throats with relatively-little consequences -- the readers can slap back. Look at the top comment, and yours, and we all see that Jamie just got intellectually-slam-dunked.
Just think of what would be possible if this happened to Dan Rather, whenever he injected leftwing bias into a story! There'd be no more need for the right-wing MRC, a compendium of bias these days. There'd also be little need for the far-less-relevant (um, the problem is not FOX, it's how bad NBC, ABC, CBS & CNN suck as journalists-of-the-left at being rational) but-at-least-they-TRY left-wing group "FAIR." As an interesting experiment, do what I've done, and subscribe to both sites' email alerts. While the MRC (and FAIR, come to think of it...) have a blind eye to stories about the tax-and-spend war on (some) drugs, the MRC makes a generally better logical case for leftist bias in the media, despite things like a repetitive format & slightly-worse editing.
You may not want to insult journalism, but you've not lived in my shoes for the last 48 hours. I think an insult or two might help matters, but I'll stick to facts if I can. Journalism ISN'T all that hard of a job to do correctly. Actually, sitting around and writing "professionally" can be pretty cushy. I know, because I've done it (right) before, sometimes in my spare time. (We can start with duh-file crap like reading a story BEFORE attempting to write an accurate headline, but on second thought, don't get me started).
Slashdot is an incredible site, and the moderation system - albeit imperfect - makes it an incredibly interesting phenomenon, but your comment and others demonstrate that Slashdot editors lack even a shadow of the ideological diversity of their audience. Higher salaries won't cure that, different hiring policies (and possibly LOWER salaries) might (and no, I'm not available to write Slashdot stories or anything else, if that's what you think I mean).
Anyway, the bottom line is that your comment is a well-spoken one, and I encourage moderators to note your admirable logic-over-emotionalism. Thanks.
JMR
No, I'm not the attorney, I just posted his letter, at his request (I vowed I wouldn't post again, and look!). Anyway, it was incredibly-bad headline writing or article-reading, one, but perhaps in response to the lawyer's mail, the headline was actually changed from sensational to factual.
JMR
I'll try really hard not to post anything more about this.
JMR
++++++++++++
sigh
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: re: Secret Service Raids E-Gold
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 19:05:34 -0500
From: Douglas Jackson
To: newsfeedback@wired.com
CC: declan@wired.com
I am the founder and Chairman of e-gold Ltd.
Contrary to the luridly irresponsible and actionable headline on this
article, there has been no raid on e-gold Ltd., or on Gold & Silver
Reserve Inc. [dba OmniPay http://www.omnipay.net ], the company that
originally developed the e-gold system and currently serves as
Operator.
The more edifying reality is that e-gold® is the worlds first
electronic currency designed for borderless eCommerce, enabling the
worldwide use of gold as money. It merges the digital transaction
efficiencies of an electronic payment system with a universally
acceptable basis of value.
The advantages of e-gold include:
Low transaction fees The maximum payment processing fee is 50 cents
(US-equiv.). For a $1000 value payment, this is less than one twentieth
as much as credit cards.
Immediate settlement e-gold payments clear instantaneously, no
matter how large or small the payment, no matter how far apart the
spender and recipient.
Non-repudiation No chargebacks. Get paid, stay paid.
Direct access with bi-directionality Anyone can pay or be paid.
Automation support The e-gold Shopping Cart Interface is easily
implemented and provides immediate authenticated notification of
completed payment.
Zero financial risk e-gold is the worlds first remote payment
system backed 100% by physical gold in allocated storage.
e-gold is in fact succeeding where other electronic payment initiatives
are failing because it is designed specifically for worldwide eCommerce.
All others merely add additional layers of liability to legacy systems.
Since online launch November 1996, the e-gold system has been growing at
an accelerating pace. As of April 2000, 100,000 transactions had been
settled. The one millionth transaction was November 2000 and the second
million mark surpassed in March 2001.
It is regrettable that the first time many people will hear of e-gold(r)
will be this sloppy and damaging Wired headline.
Exactly. For more about money, see either my friend J.S.G. Boggs' artwork (he draws the paper and mints plastic coins, and spends them) or the book Money at Principia Publishing, listed near the top of the News section of the e-gold page.
Most people don't like to think too clearly about the nature of money these days, especially if they know any history...IMNSHO, of course. I guess I should again mention my standing offer for/. readers to be clicked a bit of gold if they create accounts.
JMR
Slashdot Mirror
Just think about slashdot turning in profit...
I have. They mint a currency called mod points, which they currently give away! I can assure everyone here that if you're minting a currency, it's far better for your bottom-line if you SELL it. (I have a ten gram reward out there for the first person to hack the Slashcode so that site owners can sell mod points for e-gold, so yes, I have venal-profit-making motives for this post, but I also think it would be a cool thing for minor sites like Fairtunes and others to do. Besides, I've occasionally wanted mod points enough to pay for them, so why not sell me what I want?)
Anyway, one of the few companies that actually might make profit would be google. It's so unbelievably cool that I'd be happy to pay a few bucks a month just to use it.
I totally agree with you on this. What google might try could be an e-gold tipjar (there I go again, more venal-profit-making motives). They could accept e-gold, PayPal, and anything else they think they could sell, and many of us would give them tips because we like their service better than the other search engines. This (e-gold tipjars) can also be a solution to the "Napster problem," IMO, since if you listen to Courtney Love and other musicians, they get far less than a buck for a $15 CD.
No, I can't guarantee everyone would tip (same as the local diner in that respect) but many folks would, just to keep the musician happy, and if the average tip were a buck's worth of gold, she would not have to get a tip from everyone to do better than the RIAA does for her! IMO.
As usual, any slashdotter is free to contact me and get a bit of e-gold to play around with, just for the asking. Thanks for listening.
JMR
I used to try to get Amazon to accept e-gold (it's my job) along with plastic. I and a few others actually got to the middle-management layer, and managed to occasionally converse with Amazon management. What I discovered was an incredible quantity of pointy-haired attitude. There was a willingness to type out long emails telling why they didn't want to think about accepting a payment system alternative which they could later sell for a profit (or at least lose less on than they lose in plastic fees) but a complete UN-willingness to spend the five minutes it takes to try e-gold, despite my pleas.
:)
:)
Then one day, things changed. http://www.bananagold.com/ appeared and I vowed never to e-mail Amazon again, and then http://www.metalproxy.com/ happened quickly afterwards. Now I can buy anything I want at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or Thinkgeek. It turns out that programmer-fans of e-gold want it at spot even if major, "mainstream" merchants don't. A good thing for me, and a good example to money-losing companies like Amazon of what they're missing by talking instead of DO-ing. Amazon, instead of accepting my currency, ended up giving me $150 worth of merchandise for switching phone companies for a month. I never gave them a credit card number, and I'll never have to now!
JMR
I speak for myself, as usual, and obviously Amazon is glad I've never been a shareholder.
(When did we ever have one of those? But I digress...)
:)
In my opinion, government has become MORE corrupt since the passage of speech-limitation (go run for anything from dog-catcher to president and then tell me money isn't needed for political speech, I just wanna maybe know WHO gave to or bought your ass!) laws passed in the Watergate aftermath. Now that those laws have failed totally, there's a hankering for even MORE laws limiting political speech. These laws are called "reform" uniformly by the "mainstream" media, as their biases and friends would gain in power if people like me are silenced.
Meanwhile, media bigwigs and people like Barbra Streisand would/will continue to exercise incredible influence over elections, and their influence would only increase with these "reforms" that limit my right to waste my money if I damn-well want to waste it! As it is, if you want to waste lots of money on politics you have to be either (loser) Michael Huffington-rich or (winner, the bankers she borrowed from are probably gonna be losers, though) Maria Cantwell-rich to do it. I'm not cut out for political office and I have a job I like, but I feel I should be able to spend money on the speech I want to spend it on without limits except (maybe) saying who I gave it to. The left hems and haws, but they disagree in the end, whilst somehow retaining the "free speech" mantle! I don't see how, since my speech is less-and-less free...
Campaign finance "reform" is the same kind of Newspeak we see when we see pro-big- government "anarchists" (who are anything but anarchists!) protesting against "free trade" (which is obviously also anything-but free trade or it would not take so goddam many lawyers to describe it!). These word-thefts PISS ME OFF! The "mainstream" media must STOP letting participants in debates redefine terms! "Another law" or as I'd put it "yet-another law" is NOT the same thing as "reform" -- and I'm tired of being painted as "against reform" just because I have a different idea of how to proceed!
BTW, I'm a small-L libertarian in Florida who voted for Dave Barry as a protest message, and I don't give a crap if you either flame me or mod me down, so do your worst! I'm right.
JMR
Speaking ONLY for myself, as always. Nobody else (especially my employer) wants my opinion anyway!
Err, they get a free watch. Personally, I haven't worn a watch for the last six months, as a total of three other devices which are always on me have intergrated clocks.
I agree (and besides, watches give me that strange tan-line on my wrist so I haven't worn one for years)! Putting on my most-Orwellian hat, though, the device they probably want to begin 'harnessing' (in exchange for free airtime?) is going to be the cellphone. Mine is with me most of the time (not quite as connected to me as a watch would be -- so no heartbeat, but usually in the same room or car). The phone, of course, would have the ability to transmit responses in real-time. ["Leno, that last joke kinda sucked, but the average geek laughed pretty-hard at the one before!"]
Opinions, as always, are my own, and just because I described something doesn't mean I'm advocating it -- for example, my price for the above kind of invasion of privacy would probably be repellant to even the richest companies. Even though I could see the personal uses of bugging myself that you mentioned, bugging in my state (Florida) is a felony (unless you're a well-connected teacher's union political-hack, recording someone else's telephone conversation for later sale to opposing politicians, in which case you get off with a slap on the wrist). Ok, enough ranting...
JMR
Also, according to a recent California ruling, juries aren't allowed to use their consciences anymore and judge the law. The reason we have (the few remaining shreds of) free speech and freedom of worship is that juries in England and America judged laws against Quaker worship and truthful criticism of government officials as wrong.
The reason there's no Fugitive Slave Act, and the Salem Witch trials failed, and there's no alcohol prohibition all stems from the leadership of the common man -- juries. Not politicians, not 'leaders,' ordinary people like you and me. Unfortunately, judges like to lie about jury power and say that juries DON'T have the rights explained much better than I have at http://www.fija.org/. It's very sad for me and for the future of respect for the law when judges lie, the lie is corrosive and affects far more than one case or thing (although obviously the main target is to continue funding for the tax and spend war on some drugs, if you ask me).
JMR
Speaks ONLY for himself!!! Especially in this message!
(Blatantly-self-interested message follows, mod down at will.)
One has to have a WAY to pay with micropayments. Aside from e-gold (everyone who knows me knew THAT was coming!) there's ecoin, whose site is apparently down right now, but they show a lot of promise for simplicity compared to DigiGold, even though there's even less of an exchange market just yet.
IMNSHO, YMMV, etc. Contact me if you wish to try e-gold. Thanks.
JMR
At the risk of being modded down into oblivion, I'll say a couple of things here.
/. either (I'm sure not buyin' one at today's rates!). Yes, I'm self-interested here, and a venal greedy-capitalist, etc. so mod me down if you like.
/. readers still stands, if you want a little of the filthy yellow metal to play with, contact me. Hopefully my email will finally start working again (has nothing to do with this message, my ISP is experiencing problems due to the Earthlink-borg taking them over clumsily). Thanks for listening.
First, I've already mentioned this idea, as I think mod points are an ideal thing for owners of slashcode sites (if not Slashdot) to sell. Selling banner ads has not been the road to profitability for sites like Yahoo, and it's unlikely to work for
Second, there is a way with --or two -- using e-gold to do paid-email with pushed payments using a superior (and fun to play with!) currency. My usual offer to
JMR
I'd like to see a version where users can (warning, you're now entering Quark's! Buyer beware) purchase moderator points. I think that mod points are a form of quickly-expiring currency, and since I spend all day selling (or giving away) a currency based on the filthy yellow metal, I'd like to see an exchange market.
Will this lead to abuse, be imperfect, "censor" the poor, and cause other problems I'm not smart enough to foresee? Yes. I'll admit that. But OTOH the current system of randomly? assigning mod points is sometimes abused, is imperfect, awards NO points to those too poor to be around computers, and probably causes other problems too -- without making a profit for Andover.net.
I don't particularly care about Andover.net, actually (to see my attitude change 180 degrees, give me some shares) but it would be nice if sites like Fairtunes.com could sell something virtual for my currency (or others). If someone wants to do this and needs a bit of gold to play with, you need only contact me.
Flame away, mod me down, etc.
JMR
Thanks, very interesting. (Hmmm. Now I'm wondering if Haliburton's more into the nuclear power business than Occidental?)
When I was looking into solar power several years ago, I was surprised by the level of oil company investment. I just wish the oil companies weren't so incredibly-scared of methanol derived from hemp -- but that's a whole 'nother thread (flamefest?). Since ethanol has the corn/farm lobby, it's pretty firmly politically-entrenched, despite being provably less-efficient. One would think that those who harp on the free market would let the market work in this case (or in the case of my Cuban cigars -- sigh). Oh well, back to work now.
JMR
(I'm not up on this stuff, but) wouldn't that be bad for big oil?
JMR
(Not saying AlGore was any good either, he was just Ocidental with the media aghast instead of Halliburton with a strangely-silent news media, IMO.)
Think about the "mind" of this particular hive. I know some intelligent AOLusers, but frankly most AOLers don't fall in the "intelligent" category. When something is "so easy to use, no wonder it's #1," can anyone trust the majority of THOSE customers to make a decision? I'd be wary of decisions made by the average NON-AOL customer (or the average federal judge...) too, but this idea seems to be too much democracy to swallow. Just MHO.
JMR
Well said. This is why I say that Republicans are right for the wrong reason about SDI ("Star Wars") missile defense. The truth is, if I were (insert bad guy with a nuke) I'd NOT want to shoot the still armed-to-the-teeth with nukes USA with a missile. Missiles leave trails back to me, and I'd like to survive to be a dictator tomorrow if I can.
I'd use diplomatic pouches (sorry Customs! Can't search this!) to bring in the components needed for a car-trunk nuke, or just smuggle them in -- perhaps with some coke! It always amazes me that people think these guys will box by Marquis of Queensbury rules instead of punching for the balls without gloves, but the fact is that missiles aren't the dangerous part, it's WARHEADS. Warheads are small (and getting smaller) and missiles are delivery systems only, just like rental-cars or freighters. In all my scenarios where I'm the bad guy, Washington DC ALWAYS becomes a few square miles of glass as fancy-schmancy "Brilliant Pebbles" orbit above, impotent. (This subject & line of argument makes me very unpopular in debates, needless to say, because I'm so obviously-right! Kinda like debating the tax-&-spend war on (some) drugs, it's easier to avoid me than to face me.)
Anyway, with proper sensing technology, properly-far-out in space, an intercept can veer an asteroid off-course and prevent humans from becoming dinosaur-extinct, IF! we can get over the idea of having weapons (probably nukes, but possibly others if they have sufficient kinetic energy) in space. I don't like the idea, either, but it's the only useful thing the military industrial complex can do (and they and the politicians they own are determined to spend my money). There was even an early (James T. Kirk era) Star Trek episode about this subject, only they used a (less realistic, IMO) ground based directed energy weapon to divert the big rock.
JMR
I like Fairtunes a lot (they take e-gold!) but to be successful (IMO) any give-a-tip system would have to be right there on the Napster application, staring the person in the face. I'd agree that this is less likely since Napster has sold (out?) to Bertelsman(sp?), so when I say "Napster," please think "whatever file-sharing program ends up being dominant." From what I've seen, there's space for an e-gold account number on the Napster application, and I think that Napster would benefit as a company (and in a legal/PR sense) by encouraging this, though I doubt it's in the interest of Bertelsman(sp?).
/. readers a bit of e-gold to play with, if they send me an account number.
I didn't mean Napster users listened to crap, I just meant that folks won't tip for it, and won't any longer have to buy it or have it in their homes, and ultimately I think this will affect music in a positive way. I'd like to store ONLY songs I like, and not store any that I dislike. Before that was impossible, and now it's possible (and easy). Sorry if I was unclear.
I don't think that asking for tips is "catering to freeloaders," and I think the other person's response covers this aspect pretty well. Ultimately, with the present versions of file sharing software, it's very hard NOT to be a "freeloader" and get any use out of the product, right?
I'm sorry if you dislike my analogy, but when I think about it, with cash and in a diner I'll probably never eat in again I'm a LOT more anonymous than when I make an e-gold spend, and the recipient can see at least my account name & number. e-gold isn't anonymous cash (Mr. Greenspan prints that stuff, on nice greenish paper, and it USED to be backed with the filthy yellow metal). I tend to make my tips as anonymous as possible, putting them under something so that the intended recipient will be the one to find and get them.
As for my! heart being in the right place, thanks, but actually I'm an incredibly-greedy anarcho-capitalist evil "heartless" libertarian type of guy, and I try to make it clear that many of my posts* are self-interested. I benefit if/when more people (especially artists and programmers!) use e-gold, so I hang around here for that reason; and in order not to be TOO much of a pain in the ass, I offer to click
JMR
* I've even said that someone should hack the Slashcode so that site-owners can sell moderator points (this may or may-not be a good idea, but I think on balance it's good, and it's definitely good for ME!:) I'd be very happy if someone here did this, I haven't the skill. Thanks.
If major artists get about 25 cents from the sale of a fifteen dollar CD, they should try to migrate to a tips-for-what-you-like model, as suggested by Courtney Love, among others. As seller of a payment system that allows efficient, instant, international micro (or macro) payments, I'm of course self-interested when I say this, but it goes beyond that, and I don't care if they also use competing payment systems. The important thing is to keep the RIAA from filtering out the lion's share for -- as Ms. Love so eloquently puts it -- trips to Scores (a famous NYC stripper bar, for those who don't know).
This idea at first sounds bad for the RIAA, and it is, but it's a double-edged sword. Musicians are gonna have to get used to only being paid for good work. Packaging three (or fewer!) good songs among 12 shitty ones is NOT going to fly anymore. We won't pay. OTOH, a tipjar on the website asking for very-little e-gold might well pay more than selling the same number of CDs as free-downloads given away.
Of course, bad people will not give anything, but ask yourself what you do in an unfamiliar city at a place you'll never eat in again when tipping-time comes. I leave a tip if the service was halfway decent -- and a really-nice tip if it was great. I don't do it for the recipient, I do it for ME (I once worked for tips, that makes a difference I've found). Anyway, I'm still working to get folks to see that e-gold is a solution to the Napster "problem." It's been slow, as more folks want to argue (at least, that was my experience at CFP99) and shout than think about a new way of paying or being paid for what we want online.
JMR
Now, nobody seems bothered by yet-another 'czar,' but didn't the Russians even get rid of their czars (not saying they installed anything different/better, just making a point because this crap still bothers me).
JMR
Marc Stiegler's fine book, Earthweb, but unless the users can understand written English (or I'm missing something, which is quite possible) I'm not sure how much it will do "for the billions of people who have yet to set foot in the wired wards of the Global Village."
OTOH, like it or not, English literacy seems to be growing rapidly, and perhaps that fact -- combined with services like Babelfish (if there's a Babelfish lite?) -- means my skepticism is not justified. I hope so.
JMR
Well, there have been a few exceptions.
To find one, it's best to look at what the "mainstream" news media ignores if they can (and screws up the story when they can't) or perhaps look to companies that never even had an IPO and still have some dude yammering on about old-fashioned stuff like economic fundamentals, and bragging about being in the black while keeping the promises others made about the internet.
JMR
What I love about this is that some brilliant moderator has managed to mark it "redundant." Folks, keep in mind, this is comment number 6! I don't know if it's an attempt at humor (I can almost see the thought-process now, "I'll mark the first comments in the redundancy story redundant! That'll show 'em!") or mere /. mod-point induced cluelessness (my money's on that one, of course) but since moderations of "redundant" can't be metamoderated, I felt the need to make this totally-off-topic comment. Seriously, folks, when you have mod points, try to browse at a deliberately-lower level and take some time actually reading/thinking, eh?
(Go ahead, mod me down for spouting off like this, see if I give a rat's ass.)
JMR
Hi David, glad to see you're better now (or at least posting).
/. are what could be termed a quickly-expiring online "currency," although with limited value due to the lack of an exchange marketplace and I'm not sure the word currency is right in this case (hence the quotes).
:)
I disagree (reluctantly, I get to see the mayhem that some "average users" manage to inflict upon themselves every working day) that users won't understand -- and indeed WANT -- moderation. Indeed, I think that moderator-points on
Everyone here has probably seen a comment that they'd like to mod up (or down, I guess) and not had any points to do so. I'm not proposing this for Slashdot itself (I'm not against it, either) but it might be nice if the "SlashCode" were modified so that mod points could actually be purchased, if a site owner chose to sell them. Obviously, I stand to gain from widespread adoption of one currency in particular (which seems ideally suited for the job, IMO) but I'd of course want to let all flowers bloom if this happens.
I don't write code, and I have no idea how hard this would be to do. The sites I've seen operating the Slashcode (Cluebot and Fairtunes) seem not to have user-moderation enabled at all, so I'm not sure that's an option in the publicly available version. I think that if average users more-quickly (well, ok, slowly) saw reputation as a valuable thing -- one that should be guarded and handled with care, the 'net might benefit. I agree that it won't be an easy job trying to teach them, but in the end it might be worth it -- even for others besides greedy-old Jim Ray.
Of course, for those who don't know me, I'm tremendously self-interested and biased. I'm also ready to admit that "moderation-for-the-rich" might not improve some sites, but I'm not convinced that it's never "worth it" to sell mod points. For example, I'd have paid half a gram or so to moderate this comment up this morning. I could not, so I didn't, but look at the comment and see if that would have been a good thing for yourself. The green-eyeshades types at Andover.net just *might* want to look into how many clickthrus that single transaction would equal...Or maybe not, I don't know.
JMR
Yup. Says "previously-scheduled downtime." Check the site, we do that every once in a while...or you might just get interested in the actual issue? Whatever...
JMR
I'd mod you up another point. The good thing about Slashdot is that -- unlike Fight Censorship and some other places where the overly-political like Jamie can try to cram crap down our throats with relatively-little consequences -- the readers can slap back. Look at the top comment, and yours, and we all see that Jamie just got intellectually-slam-dunked.
Just think of what would be possible if this happened to Dan Rather, whenever he injected leftwing bias into a story! There'd be no more need for the right-wing MRC, a compendium of bias these days. There'd also be little need for the far-less-relevant (um, the problem is not FOX, it's how bad NBC, ABC, CBS & CNN suck as journalists-of-the-left at being rational) but-at-least-they-TRY left-wing group "FAIR." As an interesting experiment, do what I've done, and subscribe to both sites' email alerts. While the MRC (and FAIR, come to think of it...) have a blind eye to stories about the tax-and-spend war on (some) drugs, the MRC makes a generally better logical case for leftist bias in the media, despite things like a repetitive format & slightly-worse editing.
You may not want to insult journalism, but you've not lived in my shoes for the last 48 hours. I think an insult or two might help matters, but I'll stick to facts if I can. Journalism ISN'T all that hard of a job to do correctly. Actually, sitting around and writing "professionally" can be pretty cushy. I know, because I've done it (right) before, sometimes in my spare time. (We can start with duh-file crap like reading a story BEFORE attempting to write an accurate headline, but on second thought, don't get me started).
Slashdot is an incredible site, and the moderation system - albeit imperfect - makes it an incredibly interesting phenomenon, but your comment and others demonstrate that Slashdot editors lack even a shadow of the ideological diversity of their audience. Higher salaries won't cure that, different hiring policies (and possibly LOWER salaries) might (and no, I'm not available to write Slashdot stories or anything else, if that's what you think I mean).
Anyway, the bottom line is that your comment is a well-spoken one, and I encourage moderators to note your admirable logic-over-emotionalism. Thanks.
JMR
Speaking, as always, for myself.
No, I'm not the attorney, I just posted his letter, at his request (I vowed I wouldn't post again, and look!). Anyway, it was incredibly-bad headline writing or article-reading, one, but perhaps in response to the lawyer's mail, the headline was actually changed from sensational to factual.
JMR
I'll try really hard not to post anything more about this.
JMR
++++++++++++
sigh
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: re: Secret Service Raids E-Gold
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 19:05:34 -0500
From: Douglas Jackson
To: newsfeedback@wired.com
CC: declan@wired.com
I am the founder and Chairman of e-gold Ltd.
Contrary to the luridly irresponsible and actionable headline on this
article, there has been no raid on e-gold Ltd., or on Gold & Silver
Reserve Inc. [dba OmniPay http://www.omnipay.net ], the company that
originally developed the e-gold system and currently serves as
Operator.
The more edifying reality is that e-gold® is the worlds first
electronic currency designed for borderless eCommerce, enabling the
worldwide use of gold as money. It merges the digital transaction
efficiencies of an electronic payment system with a universally
acceptable basis of value.
The advantages of e-gold include:
Low transaction fees The maximum payment processing fee is 50 cents
(US-equiv.). For a $1000 value payment, this is less than one twentieth
as much as credit cards.
Immediate settlement e-gold payments clear instantaneously, no
matter how large or small the payment, no matter how far apart the
spender and recipient.
Non-repudiation No chargebacks. Get paid, stay paid.
Direct access with bi-directionality Anyone can pay or be paid.
Automation support The e-gold Shopping Cart Interface is easily
implemented and provides immediate authenticated notification of
completed payment.
Zero financial risk e-gold is the worlds first remote payment
system backed 100% by physical gold in allocated storage.
e-gold is in fact succeeding where other electronic payment initiatives
are failing because it is designed specifically for worldwide eCommerce.
All others merely add additional layers of liability to legacy systems.
Since online launch November 1996, the e-gold system has been growing at
an accelerating pace. As of April 2000, 100,000 transactions had been
settled. The one millionth transaction was November 2000 and the second
million mark surpassed in March 2001.
It is regrettable that the first time many people will hear of e-gold(r)
will be this sloppy and damaging Wired headline.
Dr. Douglas Jackson
Founder of e-gold
That I speak my own views, not those of OmniPay as implied in the story.
JMR
Exactly. For more about money, see either my friend J.S.G. Boggs' artwork (he draws the paper and mints plastic coins, and spends them) or the book Money at Principia Publishing, listed near the top of the News section of the e-gold page.
/. readers to be clicked a bit of gold if they create accounts.
Most people don't like to think too clearly about the nature of money these days, especially if they know any history...IMNSHO, of course. I guess I should again mention my standing offer for
JMR