Comments on: Paying For Stolen Credit Cards ‘dumps’. E-gold and Right Turn On Red http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/ Gold = Real Money Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:42:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Identity Theft Services Reviewed by Sammy http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/comment-page-1/#comment-509 Identity Theft Services Reviewed by Sammy Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:54:57 +0000 http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/?p=93#comment-509 E-Gold is not like Paypal. Paypal is better but not by much. I agree with Bill and Admin thats a very interesting statement, could you elaborate? Identity Theft Services Reviewed by Sammys last blog post..<a href="http://www.id-theft-prevention.org/Protect-Your-Identity.html" rel="nofollow">50 Ways to Protect Your Identity Review and Consumer Feedback</a> E-Gold is not like Paypal. Paypal is better but not by much. I agree with Bill and Admin thats a very interesting statement, could you elaborate?

Identity Theft Services Reviewed by Sammys last blog post..50 Ways to Protect Your Identity Review and Consumer Feedback

]]> By: admin http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/comment-page-1/#comment-95 admin Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:50:07 +0000 http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/?p=93#comment-95 Thanks Bill, there are massive differences, See next post. Thanks Bill, there are massive differences, See next post.

]]> By: Bill St. Clair http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/comment-page-1/#comment-91 Bill St. Clair Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:57:02 +0000 http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/?p=93#comment-91 I don't know why e-gold is different than Paypal & Western Union, except perhaps that Paypal allows charges to be reversed, and e-gold doesn't. It's stated in <a href="http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/terms.htm" rel="nofollow">their terms of use</a> (sections 2.4 & 2.5) that if you transfer gold to the wrong account, or purchase something with e-gold that is never delivered, it isn't e-gold's problem. Or maybe Paypal agreed to some government bureaucrat's demands, and e-gold didn't. Possibly Western Union's business model, shipping money to a location to be picked up by someone who can identify himself as the recipient, requires identification, though they could do it by knowledge of a passphrase, agreed to by the sender and recipient, and told to Western Union by the sender, and that would likely work just as well. Maybe it's because Paypal and Western Union deal in Federal Reserve Notes, and e-gold doesn't. Personally, I see no valid reason for the difference, but then, I gave up a long time ago trying to make any sense out of legislated "law". I don’t know why e-gold is different than Paypal & Western Union, except perhaps that Paypal allows charges to be reversed, and e-gold doesn’t. It’s stated in their terms of use (sections 2.4 & 2.5) that if you transfer gold to the wrong account, or purchase something with e-gold that is never delivered, it isn’t e-gold’s problem.

Or maybe Paypal agreed to some government bureaucrat’s demands, and e-gold didn’t. Possibly Western Union’s business model, shipping money to a location to be picked up by someone who can identify himself as the recipient, requires identification, though they could do it by knowledge of a passphrase, agreed to by the sender and recipient, and told to Western Union by the sender, and that would likely work just as well.

Maybe it’s because Paypal and Western Union deal in Federal Reserve Notes, and e-gold doesn’t.

Personally, I see no valid reason for the difference, but then, I gave up a long time ago trying to make any sense out of legislated “law”.

]]> By: admin http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/comment-page-1/#comment-86 admin Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:58:26 +0000 http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/?p=93#comment-86 Bill I agree with you (you are preaching to the choir) but, now we are getting to the meat of the issue, American law makers say "it's e-gold's business to know exactly who is using their system". They say e-gold is an online payment system just like PayPal or online banking, and the operators should know each account holder and police their transactions. Why or better yet, HOW is e-gold different from PayPal from a legal monitoring position? They both transfer value online (digital units from one account to another)....why does one report and police all financial transactions(paypal) and why does e-gold not have to? I know the answers to these questions, but just once I'd like to hear someone else recite the same answer with the same logic. What makes e-gold different from paypal? -------------- I'll take it one more stab at this, I've said this a hundred times: If I walk into a Western Union location and collect $2000 (an incoming transfer from a local friend) they require my government issued ID, and they will fingerprint me. I've done it a dozen times. If I open an e-gold account tomorrow, I can transfer $200-300k USD in value here, there, to any country I like ....run it through my e-gold account without providing any ID or even having to verify my identity. What laws and logic require me to get ID'd, printed and have to sign the form on a $2k transfer but for $200k-300,000 USD run though my e-gold account no ID required and no verification of who I am or where the money came from. Why the difference in reporting? How is that possible...what makes the e-gold closed end accounting system so special that it allows such freedom??? Again, I already have some logical and legal answers to these I want someone to explain it to me, how is this permitted, what are the specific differences that allow un reported, un verified and open transactions when others have to comply? Mark Herpel Bill I agree with you (you are preaching to the choir) but, now we are getting to the meat of the issue, American law makers say “it’s e-gold’s business to know exactly who is using their system”. They say e-gold is an online payment system just like PayPal or online banking, and the operators should know each account holder and police their transactions.

Why or better yet, HOW is e-gold different from PayPal from a legal monitoring position?

They both transfer value online (digital units from one account to another)….why does one report and police all financial transactions(paypal) and why does e-gold not have to?

I know the answers to these questions, but just once I’d like to hear someone else recite the same answer with the same logic. What makes e-gold different from paypal?
————–
I’ll take it one more stab at this, I’ve said this a hundred times: If I walk into a Western Union location and collect $2000 (an incoming transfer from a local friend) they require my government issued ID, and they will fingerprint me. I’ve done it a dozen times. If I open an e-gold account tomorrow, I can transfer $200-300k USD in value here, there, to any country I like ….run it through my e-gold account without providing any ID or even having to verify my identity.

What laws and logic require me to get ID’d, printed and have to sign the form on a $2k transfer but for $200k-300,000 USD run though my e-gold account no ID required and no verification of who I am or where the money came from. Why the difference in reporting? How is that possible…what makes the e-gold closed end accounting system so special that it allows such freedom??? Again, I already have some logical and legal answers to these I want someone to explain it to me, how is this permitted, what are the specific differences that allow un reported, un verified and open transactions when others have to comply?

Mark Herpel

]]> By: Bill St. Clair http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/07/paying-for-stolen-credit-cards-dumps-e-gold-and-right-turn-on-red/comment-page-1/#comment-84 Bill St. Clair Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:57:40 +0000 http://www.dgcmagazine.com/blog/?p=93#comment-84 The answer to your question should be that e-gold hasn't stopped that use of their currency because, as a currency provider, it isn't any of their business how people use their currency. It's illegal for people to buy or sell stolen goods, but the crime is in the stealing, and in the purchase of known stolen goods. It's not the currency provider's responsibility to do anything about it. That governments have gotten fond of tracking transactions, and that you can stop some crime by making it difficult for payments to change hands, doesn't make snooping into everybody's transactions OK. And I'll go further. It's also not the currency provider's problem if the product is pornography, even child pornography. Or atomic bombs. They provide a trading mechanism. Not a crime-fighting tool. And they should not be compelled to violate their customers' privacy in order to potentially reduce crime. Now if a currency provider WANTS to know his customers, to do what he can to stop criminals from using his service, that's another thing entirely. It may be good business practice to do so. But that's for the market to decide, not the legislatures. I, for one, want my online currencies to be completely anonymous. Just like cash, or gold coins. I don't want anybody, except those who trade with me, to have the possibility of discovering anything about my purchases. That's why I like Loom. The answer to your question should be that e-gold hasn’t stopped that use of their currency because, as a currency provider, it isn’t any of their business how people use their currency. It’s illegal for people to buy or sell stolen goods, but the crime is in the stealing, and in the purchase of known stolen goods. It’s not the currency provider’s responsibility to do anything about it. That governments have gotten fond of tracking transactions, and that you can stop some crime by making it difficult for payments to change hands, doesn’t make snooping into everybody’s transactions OK. And I’ll go further. It’s also not the currency provider’s problem if the product is pornography, even child pornography. Or atomic bombs. They provide a trading mechanism. Not a crime-fighting tool. And they should not be compelled to violate their customers’ privacy in order to potentially reduce crime.

Now if a currency provider WANTS to know his customers, to do what he can to stop criminals from using his service, that’s another thing entirely. It may be good business practice to do so. But that’s for the market to decide, not the legislatures.

I, for one, want my online currencies to be completely anonymous. Just like cash, or gold coins. I don’t want anybody, except those who trade with me, to have the possibility of discovering anything about my purchases. That’s why I like Loom.

]]>