×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

189 comments

Digital Rothschilds (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194089)

"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.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194119)

Actual quote: "Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws."

Re:Digital Rothschilds (-1, Offtopic)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194377)

Oh the linnsanity!

Re:Digital Rothschilds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194627)

The Jews control international banking and are using Jeremy Lin to promote miscegenation to destroy the white race, is that what you're getting at here?

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Interesting)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194141)

One would argue that they might not do a better job compared to the leaders that we currently vote in.

Here's one for you. Opt in citizenship to a nationless, territory free country. I wonder how many might not try to be a part of such a thing. I often wondered what would happen if a group started buying up adjoining land and reserved it for new members, and spread out and out as more members joined. Set up a civilised statute early on and let people come in as they wanted to.

It would be like colonising an already colonised land through market transactions and finance. I also think it would scare the bejesus out of the governments.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (2)

Entropius (188861) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194197)

I would sign up for this in a heartbeat.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194251)

go for it...

http://www.wirtland.com/

Re:Digital Rothschilds (4, Interesting)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195347)

Actually, there are already several principalities around the world. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River [wikipedia.org]

The problem is how to be legally recognised as a seperate country. There have been several groups who have decided to take the easiest legal route, which is to declare war upon a country. Note that in the wikipedia article, the declaration of war is mentioned in the history section. The Australian government did not acknowledge these letters officially, as this would give creedence to the country's secession. They have issued their own coins, code of laws, and a tax rate of 0.5%.

There are many such countries out there, but what has not been done to date, is a serious quantity of land to be bought by a serious number of citizens, an army mounted, and a genuine declaration of war. This would seriously best be done in a place such as Africa or regions of South America where there are areas of land that can be bought at reasonable rates, whilst not being a pacific island that would hold difficulties in sustaining a substantial population.

Perhaps one day the need will be large enough for people to collectively leave and equitably found their own country, but don't forget, established countries will first scoff at a new country, possibly impose trade sanctions if they don't tow the line, and finally, simply declare war and "liberate" it from the "terrorists".

The issues of state are far removed from the issues of daily life.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

azrael29a (1349629) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195579)

"There are many such countries out there, but what has not been done to date, is a serious quantity of land to be bought by a serious number of citizens, an army mounted, and a genuine declaration of war" What about Israel? Isn't it how this country has been created?

Re:Digital Rothschilds (3, Informative)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195691)

Israel was not established and ratified as a purchased country. It was held by the brits from the second world war, and when the British Mandate was about to expire, they declared independence. It was ratified as a country by the UN, which is quite distinct from the international law doctrine of natural ratification through the declaration of war upon another sovereign.

Even though I'm probably feeding the worst kind of troll, I thought I would correct it before more misinformation was spread.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Insightful)

sg_oneill (159032) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194215)

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!"

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194275)

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

Re:Digital Rothschilds (3, Insightful)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194751)

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).

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195837)

Think of the children...

Re:Digital Rothschilds (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194239)

It would simply die to lack of recognition. It doesn't work if no one recognises you as a country, and no one would.

Sure, you could set extra rules, laws and power structure. But these would only exist on top of what is already in existence in the location of your choice. These mechanisms already exist in many countries, ranging from religious enclaves in Israel and Amish settlements in USA to anarchists of Freetown of Christiania. There are also lesser cases of this, like agreeing to arbitrage by certain courts (for example sharia courts in UK).

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1, Flamebait)

Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194315)

There are also lesser cases of this, like agreeing to arbitrage by certain courts (for example sharia courts in UK).

There are sharia courts in the UK? SCARY!

Re:Digital Rothschilds (3, Insightful)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194359)

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.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194993)

arbitrage is fully compliant with the existing laws

in which case no need for arbitrage was necessary, really. but in context of sharia.. it's not fully compliant in any way nor would it's decisions be lawfully binding so..

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Informative)

JoelKatz (46478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195061)

Sharia arbitration courts issue rulings that are legally binding on those who have agreed to be bound by them. So, for example, if you and I both wanted to, we could enter into a contract that stipulates that any disputes that arise over the terms of the contract would be settled by a Sharia arbitration court. The rulings would be legally enforceable, provided:

1) The only parties were those who had agreed by contract to be bound by the arbitration prior to the dispute arising.

2) The case is purely civil, not criminal.

3) The court doesn't violate public policy. (For example, if the court refused to allow women to testify, the ruling would likely be unenforceable.)

Orthodox Jews and several other groups have their own "courts" that arbitrate disputes among those who consent by contract to their jurisdiction. Generally, their rulings are enforceable in ordinary civil courts.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (2)

makomk (752139) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195437)

Actually, there's a special provision in UK law for religious courts that was only moved into the law on binding arbitration in general a few years ago, though even then I think they could only rule on cases where both parties had agreed to be bound by their ruling. The law was created in order to allow Jewish religious courts, so is unlikely to go away any time soon.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (4, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194457)

Arbitration [wikipedia.org] (not arbitrage) occurs in various contexts all the time [google.com]. The same people who freak out about Muslims doing this among themselves, of course, have no qualms about this common practice in business, for example. Or maybe they are just mad because they assume the Muslims stole the idea from 1 Corinthians Chapter 6 [biblegateway.com] in the New Testament (yes, secular courts are clearly unbiblical).

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195717)

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.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

EdZ (755139) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194357)

There are also lesser cases of this, like agreeing to arbitrage by certain courts (for example sharia courts in UK)

Only if you fall into the insane alternate universe inhabited by the Daily Fail or similar nonsense-rags.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

LordSnooty (853791) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194839)

They do exist - without official recognition but if both sides agree to use one they can be as legally enforceable as a contract.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194955)

An employee will go home and he'll tell his neighbor, 'Hey, did you get an award?' And the neighbor will say, 'No man, I mean I slave all day and nobody notices me.' Next thing you know, employee smells something terrible coming from the neighbor’s house. Neighbor’s hanged himself... due to lack of recognition.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194255)

You think laws are bad enough in lagging behind technology? This would take it to a whole new level. I can see it now.

"By joining this territory free country you have rejected your citizenship in every physical country. The international laws do not recognize virtual countries. We are going to keep you in this cell for a while..."

Re:Digital Rothschilds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194809)

Actually the Federal Reserve isn't directly elected, and Bernanke et. all are doing a fairly good job. Inflation has been near rock bottom without ever going into deflation for years now, they've done just about everything they can to manage since 2008, including ditching any hint of presidential and congressional approval to make massive temporary loans to banks in order to keep more of them from going Lehman Brother on us, probably keeping the US and much of the rest of the world from collapsing into a second great depression. All said loans were swiftly paid back, and since the Fed has been responsible for the quickest, most coherent response to the recent hard economic times out of just about any governmental body in the world.

Not that they haven't made some quibbling mistakes, inflation might technically be too low, helping banks to sit on top of cheap mounds of capital without the need to restart the process of actually giving out loans. But for the most part they've been doing an excellent job.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

Pax681 (1002592) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195773)

Actually the Federal Reserve isn't directly elected, and Bernanke et. all are doing a fairly good job. Inflation has been near rock bottom without ever going into deflation for years now, they've done just about everything they can to manage since 2008, including ditching any hint of presidential and congressional approval to make massive temporary loans to banks in order to keep more of them from going Lehman Brother on us, probably keeping the US and much of the rest of the world from collapsing into a second great depression. All said loans were swiftly paid back, and since the Fed has been responsible for the quickest, most coherent response to the recent hard economic times out of just about any governmental body in the world.

Not that they haven't made some quibbling mistakes, inflation might technically be too low, helping banks to sit on top of cheap mounds of capital without the need to restart the process of actually giving out loans. But for the most part they've been doing an excellent job.

all said loans paid back.. oh yeah and then swiftly claimed back against their tax bill and thus they didn't really pay it back if you know what i mean. it was just fucking free money to the banks
in fact you will find the only people really paying interest on those loans would have been the US Govt , and thus the tax payer,who would have borrowed it from the Federal Reserve you better believe the Federal reserve would want it back with that interest.
it was bankers bailing out bankers with a get out clause for returning the payment.. ie the ability to write it off against tax as a "legitimate" business expense
Also the problem with havering VERY low interest rates is that unemployment goes up... this is a basic economic principle... the really key is finding the equilibrium between interest rates and unemployment rates and the banks don't really give a fuck about that they only care about the bottom line.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

crutchy (1949900) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195059)

so when you lose your job, do you sign up to their corporate welfare office?

if i were a shareholder of such corporation, I would think it were a good idea

corporations have no ethics. we would all wind up being slaves to corporate gluttony

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195151)

"territory free country"?

That's a bit like 'oxygen free air' - which you are welcome to try using in your 'territory free country'.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195201)

That's exactly how Palestine was colonized by Zionists in the 1930-40:s. Except not everyone was free to join, only those of Jewish ancestry. I'd imagine the same thing would happen now as it did then - if you have enough money you can buy your way through.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195263)

Doesn't that describe Judaism a hundred years ago? (Well, minus the easy opt-in part.) Or any diaspora culture?

Re:Digital Rothschilds (5, Insightful)

Corbets (169101) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194591)

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.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (2)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194733)

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

When I read that quote, I think, "So, a banker thinks he's the most important person in the country. Who would have guessed that a banker would have an overinflated ego?"

Seriously, the one making laws has so many ways to rip control from the one controlling the money, that only a serious lack of creativity could make you believe that the banker was more powerful. To take one example from US history, the lawmakers could confiscate everyone's gold.

Re:Digital Rothschilds (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195683)

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

That is a spurious quotation [wikiquote.org]. There's no evidence Rothschild ever said such a thing. And considering that a great many instances of that quotation on the web are from white supremacist websites, by perpetuating it you don't make yourself look too good (though perhaps that's why you're an AC).

For the love of God... (4, Funny)

imamac (1083405) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194099)

Please no more bit coin stories...oh...my bad.

I heard you like bit coin stories. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194117)

So I added a bit coin story to your bit coin story.

It's

Re:For the love of God... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194127)

No, no, don't worry. Evidently, Google realized how stupid an idea something like that was, which is more than can be said about Slashdot.

Re:For the love of God... (5, Insightful)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194207)

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

Re:For the love of God... (2)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194241)

Well of course private money supplies ranks right up there with private militias as a threat to democracy.

Re:For the love of God... (2)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195037)

In this case private money, or a system of internal credit is all about tax evasion and lock in. Goggle would have gained the opportunity to trade in services tax free, buying in for example user content with goggle currency and then on-selling that content for goggle currency not taxable cash. It then treats purchases of google currency not as a purchase but as a deposit. It would then seek to block the sale of google currency for cash to drive lock in to the google currency system. For end users it allows them to trade google currency for services tax free. Once trade in the currency reached at certain level, laws would change and the shit would hit the fan in back taxes.

Re:For the love of God... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195657)

No please, keep them coming. Then maybe Google will buy Bitcoin, rebrand it as "Money+", and it will be gone within a year.

I believe they did issue currency (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194121)

back in 2004 at an exchange rate of about 85 USD per share. The dollar hasn't fared so well against it since then.

Google Citizenship (1)

fredc97 (963879) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194129)

With the new EULA they will probably introduce a Google Citizenship somewhere in there. This way you could simply sign in to Google+ at the various borders to prove your identity and the border patrol would in return Google your browsing history to see if you pose any threat to national security.

As for Google Bucks well they already have the Google shares which you can buy for their weight in gold and some more.

Currency? (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194149)

I'm waiting for the Google national flag and anthem.

Re:Currency? (4, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194481)

I'm not sure, but I imagine their anthem will go something like this:

[chant and response]
"What are we going to do today, Sergey?"
"Same thing we do every day, Eric. Try to take over the world!"

[music]
They're Pinky and the Brain.
Yes, Pinky and the Brain!
One is a genius,
The other is insane!
They're laboratory mice.
Their genes have been spliced!
They're dinky, they're Pinky and the Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain,
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain,
Brain.

Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled.
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.

They're Pinky and The Brain.
Yes, Pinky and The Brain
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.

To prove their mousy worth,
They'll overthrow the Earth.
They're dinky, they're Pinky and The Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain

Narf!

Re:Currency? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195815)

Those are the exact lyrics to the song. One would think when you put the whole song in there you would at least change the lyrics a little to make it funny. 1/10 for this subsubstandard comedy.

Don't they see the writing on the Google+ Wall? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194163)

Social Networking is missing a major concept right now. Everyone has something they want to sell. Why not let every social networking user setup a "web store" in their profile to sell things to other users. Think Facebook + Paypal + EBay. Some people will sell services, while others will sell crafts, home made things, or even used items. I know my local club, which has a Facebook group page, would love to sell T-Shirts and buttons to fans of ours. This seems like a missed opportunity. If Google want to get involved with commerce then all they need to do is set it up in Google+.

Don't get me started on my other Google rant. Google+ should have been named "Google Me". Would have been a lot more cool.

Re:Don't they see the writing on the Google+ Wall? (1)

Splab (574204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194871)

Because craigslist already fills this niche, and somewhat better...

I don't want to buy my friends used stuff - and I wouldn't sell it to them, if I have something I'm not using and my friend can use it it's his for free.

If I want to buy something used I go to the local equivalent of craigslist.

Re:Don't they see the writing on the Google+ Wall? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194947)

?.. I know my local club, which has a Facebook group page, would love to sell T-Shirts and buttons to fans of ours. .

Check out www.groupspaces.com for your local club. Does exactly what you want.

Bitcoin? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194165)

Google Bitcoins? What?

Re:Bitcoin? (2)

gox (1595435) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194477)

Schmidt actually brought up Bitcoin himself. Full quote: [theverge.com]

6:36 pm Q: If it comes to real democracy, payment has to be peer-to-peer. Would you like to know about my technology called FairCash?

6:37 pm A: Are you familiar with BitCoin? There are some issues with peer-to-peer money. In most cases it's illegal, besides that it's a great idea. We had our own proposal called Google Bucks, but we didn't want to get into these issues. Most of these systems will have reguatory
issues.

This company scares me more and more (0, Troll)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194185)

Google very motto ("don't do evil") has scared me from the get-go, like some sort of ominous sarcastic lie. Now Google has grown big, ubiquitous, and most importantly, discreetly, as most people don't seem to realize just how pervasive Google's presence is in the life of everybody on this planet.

Any company that's big and powerful enough to seriously think about issuing its own currency needs to be broken up in a hurry.

Re:This company scares me more and more (4, Insightful)

Mouldy (1322581) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194233)

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

Re:This company scares me more and more (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194881)

Company specific currency IS very bad. That's why casinos have chips as you mentioned, because it removes you one step further from the thought that you're spending your real money and thus makes you spend more. Also "Itchy & Scratchy Money" can dissapear overnight and all of your invested money would also be gone. The government issiued currency is backed by the whole economy and not just by one company.

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195551)

The government issiued currency is backed by the whole economy and not just by one company.

Yeah, tell me how did that work out for Germans and Poles circa 1923, Brazilians circa 1994, Greeks circa 1944, Peruvians circa 1990... shall I go on?

Re:This company scares me more and more (4, Insightful)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194297)

Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?

Re:This company scares me more and more (3, Insightful)

basecastula (2556196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194381)

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.

Re:This company scares me more and more (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194489)

Because the government will invade your country if you dare consider using another currency. You know Iraq had switched to the Euro for oil, the US sure didn't like that. [globalresearch.ca] So if google actually pushed a currency the government couldn't manipulate with the bank controlled FED they'd be signing their own execution papers.

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194563)

So "backed by guys with guns" make a currency legitimate in your eyes? So a company with enough firepower could issue "legitimate currency"? I would think legitimacy has more to do with the way the people who control the money issuing is determined. I guess might makes right usually wins out in the end though.

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

Fjandr (66656) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194693)

Pretty much any artificial medium of trade must be backed up by guns unless it is sufficiently hard to counterfeit or not accepted widely enough to be worth counterfeiting.

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195329)

Right, what I was asking is: Why it is scary if a company does this, but not if it is a government?

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194383)

In thoery a country has significantly more assets to back its currency than google and whereas google could in theory disappear overnight with a few bad decisions, most countries will be here tomorrow, next year and possibly even the year after that, you definitely can't say the same of a company that depends 100% on virtual assets.

Re:This company scares me more and more (1)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194435)

Right, but the parent seemed to distrust companies with the power to issue money. It didn't seem to be an issue of whether the value of the currency was reliable. In fact, it was the opposite.

Re:This company scares me more and more (2)

GofG (1288820) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195195)

In order to live in the United States, you must pay the United States Government a tax. This tax must be in the form of United States Dollars. You can always use USD to pay your taxes. The government is never going to accept anything other than USD, and so there is an anchoring point for USD where there is none for, say, bitcoins. That is what makes USD legitimate; the fact that you can *always guaranteed* use it to pay your taxes.

and? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194289)

I once had the idea to bit bang digital audio out of a scsi port, pipe it over CB and decode it 8 miles away on a Packard Bell. Crazy ideas that failed to be is what keeps things rolling in the world... but since its google a basic idea that has failed many times gets a front page story based on 4 sentences

those damn geniuses, maybe next they will introduce the world to "social networking"!

Google Money.... Gooney? (3, Interesting)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194345)

I wonder what the conversion rate of a 50 dollar bill is into Gooney.

Ah, Gooney sounds kinda lame, I'd have went for street rep instead and called it G-Money.

Re:Google Money.... Gooney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194421)

Just call it 'Goney'... Gone Money

Re:Google Money.... Gooney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194577)

Given that Canada has a Loony and a Toony ...
eventually they might get to issuing a Goony but that's quite a devaluation as a Goony = a googol Loonies?
(that's 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Loonies. )

I thought my 50.000,000,000 note from Zimbabwe was interesting.

Would you accept google's governance? (3, Interesting)

mykos (1627575) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194349)

Right now, we get nothing in return for getting all our private data rummaged through by the government.

At least google gives us useful free stuff.

Re:Would you accept google's governance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194743)

Our governments don't sell our private data to everyone.

One requirement (2)

basecastula (2556196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194371)

a direct democracy with mandatory voting.

Re:One requirement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194657)

So the right answer is just C??

Seriously, think before you write stuff. Mandatory voting just gets you more uninformed morons voting. Even worse, they just vote randomly.

Re:One requirement (2)

FireFury03 (653718) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194819)

So the right answer is just C??

Seriously, think before you write stuff. Mandatory voting just gets you more uninformed morons voting. Even worse, they just vote randomly.

If the morons voted randomly then it wouldn't be a problem - the signal is easilly extractable from random noise. The problem is that morons are usually easy to manipulate, so rather than adding random noise they add bias induced by the press.

Re:One requirement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195291)

"If the morons voted randomly then it wouldn't be a problem - the signal is easilly extractable from random noise."

Google sells advertising. Advertising = public relations = propaganda = foxnews (for example).

Mr. Creepy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194441)

If only this imbecile could keep quiet. He's done more to damage Google's reputation than all the other privacy fiascos combined. He is one of the main reasons why I won't touch a Google product with a 10ft pole.

its coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39194601)

facebook sells credits for the stupid facebook games.. when google+ gets rolling they will do something similar... not quite legal tender, but if its "spendable" via any google property (including checkout/wallet).. it's as close as google will get without buying out the federal government.

Ripple Monetary System (4, Interesting)

crf00 (1048098) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194623)

When I saw the phrase "peer to peer money's system" I immediately think of the Ripple Monetary System [ripple-project.org]. Please also check out the new Ripple website, Villages.cc [villages.cc], created by Ripple's founder Ryan Fugger last year.

I am not sure whether Google was trying to do the same thing, but it would be a total waste if they gave up on the exact same idea. If there is one thing that Google should do with it's power, it would be P2P money. The entire economic system is in total mess now, and the whole world is in deep need right now for a better economic system, yet why is the financial regulation trying to stop all innovations happening?

The US government is seriously killing all financial innovations by labeling everything alternative to the USD as "money laundering". Remember how Liberty dollar and other gold currencies ended up? How about the countless payment startups that has been killed under the name "money laundering" during the dotcom boom? The Hawala System [wikipedia.org] is very useful even today and it has a very similar concept to Ripple, but it's whole advantages are completely denied by US in the name of money laundering, again. I bet that the FBI would even declare Bitcoin as illegal when it generates enough threat.

I have only been staying in Stockholm for a month, but currently it gives me the feeling that Sweden and some other Europe countries have much more financial freedom than in US. If I were to create a startup based on alternative currencies ideas similar to Google's P2P money or Ripple, then Stockholm would be a much better place than Silicon Valley, all due to the absurd US anti-money laundering regulation.

Re:Ripple Monetary System (2, Insightful)

u38cg (607297) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195041)

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.

Re:Ripple Monetary System (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195317)

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.

Locking everyone in their houses, issuing a curfew and shooting anyone who ventures outside without a uniform will also drive down 'crime'. That doesn't make it a decent idea.

The golden rule is "it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent man to be punished". Banning something just because it has illegitimate uses isn't just.

Re:Ripple Monetary System (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195253)

Yeah, it ever occur to you that maybe people actually were using hawala to launder money? You just assumed it wasn't? How's that work? If I were looking to launder money, something like hawala would look to be ideal.

So, you like it in Sweden. My advice: stay there. Additional advice: take every opportunity you possibly can to tell everyone how superior you feel. Be sure to bash America in the same sentence. Basically, be just like that guy who is constantly mentioning he doesn't own a television [theonion.com], only in your case, substitute "watching TV" to "living in Sweden".

They Used That One Thing They Never Use? (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 2 years ago | (#39194897)

Restraint? Corporations never use that! Zynga probably has a patent on Zynga bucks or something.

Anywhoo, I'm sure we'd all be happy citizens of Googlandia! They'd know what each and every one of us likes and they'd probably be happy to give it to us. Being unhappy would probably be illegal. Unhappy citizens would be rounded up by Unhappiness Death Squads and sent off to be reeducated. Or at least heavily medicated. A lovely dystopian utopia to spend your years!

Google, Facebook, (fill in) money is inevitable (1)

rainhill (86347) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195047)

ka-ching!
or as Agent Smith would say, Sound of inevitability.

Nice try (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195103)

But remember, to use the money, you first need to set up a (free!!) Gmail account. Of course, you first need to log in to it each time you want to give or receive payment. Also, your Android phone will secretly use up some of your data to tell Google where you are while handling the money, how much it was, and what for it was spent.

How many pumkins will you take for that there zippo lighter?

why is this tool relevant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195227)

Why is he still on the google team? He is the evil of google and I'm sure it was his idea to merge all google accounts.
Please someone come up with the google killer!

Why legal issues? (3, Interesting)

kbg (241421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195515)

Why would that have legal issues? Doesn't Microsoft have it's own currency called "Microsoft Points"? There doesn't seem to be any problems using that currency?

Re:Why legal issues? (1)

kbg (241421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39195705)

Also most airline companies have their own currencies also, they are called "Frequent flyer points".

Google == Special Circumstances (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39195557)

You know, every time I read an Iain M Banks novel I get this creeping suspicion that Google is in fact a front for some kind of mostly-benevolent highly advanced alien civiliastion, who are using it to covertly influence and ultimately improve human society. Or maybe they're just fucking with us.

Posted AC for obvious reasons.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...