Schmidt: Google Once Considered Issuing Currency 189
itwbennett writes "In his keynote speech at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said the company once 'had various proposals to have [its] own currency [it was] going to call Google Bucks.' The idea was to implement a 'peer-to-peer money' system, but it was squelched by legal issues."
Digital Rothschilds (Score:2, Insightful)
"Give me controll of a nation's money supply and i care who not sets its laws...."
-Mayer Amschel Rothschild
Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Informative)
Actual quote: "Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Google: "Don't be evil"
Money = root of all evil
Google Bucks =? Divide by zero
Re: (Score:3)
... Love of Money = root of all evil
FTFY
German? (Score:2)
I don't think Rothschild spoke that quote in english, so I think we may have some room for translator interpation.
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:3)
I would sign up for this in a heartbeat.
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Interesting)
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 (Score:4, Informative)
Even though I'm probably feeding the worst kind of troll, I thought I would correct it before more misinformation was spread.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:4, Insightful)
It sounds like what you need is a good Home Owner's Association!
That's like living in the "People's Republic of Suburbia", complete with central committee (HOA board), secret police (rent-a-cops), and informants (nosy neighbors).
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Where does it say that?
Re: (Score:2)
Section 105 of Public Law 108-21, for instance, makes it a domestic crime to engage in certain flavors of sex tourism involving children, regardless of the legality and enforcement(or lack thereof) in the local jurisdiction.
I suspect that there is a patchwork of similar bandaid-type stuff regarding a few other hot categories of 'stuff the feds don't
Re: (Score:3)
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 c
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:4, Insightful)
Why? If people feel that they can get arbitrage which suits their beliefs better then government's system, and all parties agree to such arbitrage, and such arbitrage is fully compliant with the existing laws, why is it scary?
I'll assume this was just a bad case of sarcasm malfunction on my part.
Re: (Score:2)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:4, Insightful)
People don't freak out about arbitration, they freak out about the sharia. You know because they stone people and hate women and stuff and think it's ok because the sharia demands it.
If two muslims get some sort of sharia judgement in the UK that involves stoning someone to death, they are most likely both going to prison for a very long time unless they dispose of the corpse nice and quietly and nobody else finds out.
As a brit I have no problems with a couple of Muslims settling their differences outside court by whatever means the like. Just don't expect me to be bound by that shit for a second.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's not just people settling their differences outside of court, it's a legally enforceable arbitration process. So if one says "Eh, you know what, I changed my mind I don't like this sharia garbage" too bad.
But I thought contracts or other agreements that have elements of discrimination is unenforceable? For instance if you said "To rent my property you have to agree to arbitration by Jim Crow law" -- and you apply that equally to all people -- that's still discriminatory against blacks and it wouldn
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
corporations have no ethics. we would all wind up being slaves to corporate gluttony
Hasn't that happened already?
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting other countries to recognize your virtual nation.
Re: (Score:2)
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 clau
Re: (Score:2)
Also the problem with havering VERY low interest rates is that unemployment goes up... this is a basic economic principle...
This isn't necessarily cause and effect. Low interest rates are used to stimulate investment, which is typically done during times of economic distress. Yes you will see low interest rates when there is high unemployment, but low interest rates doesn't necessarily cause the unemployment. Rather the conditions that cause unemployment cause the Fed to lower interest rates.
The problem we
Re: (Score:2)
oh yeah and then swiftly claimed back against their tax bill and thus they didn't really pay it back
You don't seem to understand how tax deductions work. Let me guess, you are one of those people that given the opportunity to pay off your mortgage you wouldn't just so you could continue to take the tax deduction on the interest you're paying.
. Posting anonymously because I do not feel like arguing with someone who uses [fucking] emotion rather than reason to form their opinion.
erm.. i don't have a mortgage because......... my mortgage is paid off.......
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Zionism_and_the_British_mandate [wikipedia.org]
Re:Digital Rothschilds (Score:5, Insightful)
Given Google's veracity for hegemony, this type of news does not surprise me.
I'm guessing you meant voracity - but their habitual truthfulness in leadership may also be unsurprising, I don't know.
Re: (Score:3)
"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 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh for crap sake. (Score:2)
Google was not looking to control the nation's money supply. Just it's own money point system. Online games like WoW and 2nd life do this. I think MS tried to do this also.
The nation's money supply is managed by people much more evil than Google.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair it was not as sinister as it implies. It is the thinking that central banking has more affect on economics than legislature action. It isn't as if they could overrule the government on murder or control something in a deeper way. Also this is why in almost every modern western country the government has control of the money supply and sets policy from there...Including the US. We just simply choose to use a more autonomous system to avoid it being directly affected by short-term politics.
For the love of God... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Bitcoin is completely irrelevant to news for nerds. Oh, wait, no it isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
No please, keep them coming. Then maybe Google will buy Bitcoin, rebrand it as "Money+", and it will be gone within a year.
Re:For the love of God... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, as opposed to "real" money, which is different in some meaningfull way, I assure you!
Re: (Score:3)
Well of course private money supplies ranks right up there with private militias as a threat to democracy.
Re: (Score:3)
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 allow
Re: (Score:2)
The key difference with "real" money is non-geeks readily accept it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, besides the part where I can take it to any commercial establishment in my country, and have it accepted as payment for goods and services?
Dollars have that, bitcoin does not.
I believe they did issue currency (Score:5, Funny)
Currency? (Score:2)
Re:Currency? (Score:5, Funny)
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? (Score:4, Funny)
A very subtle and easy alteration is all that is needed to make that joke fit that much better:
[chant and response]
"What are we going to do today, Sergey?"
"Same thing we do every day, Larry. Try to take over the world!"
[music]
They're Page-y and the Brin.
Yes, Page-y and the Brin!
One is a genius,
The other is insane!
They're laboratory mice.
Their genes have been spliced!
They're dinky, they're Page-y and the Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin,
Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin,
Brin.
Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled.
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.
They're Page-y and The Brin.
Yes, Page-y and The Brin
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.
To prove their mousy worth,
They'll overthrow the Earth.
They're dinky, they're Page-y and The Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin
Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin
Narf!
Re: (Score:2)
A few seggestions:
Try to take over the world
Try to index the world's information
They're Page-y and the Brin.
Larry and the Brin?
They're dinky, they're Page-y and the Brin, Brin, Brin, Brin,
They're cagey, they're Page-y...
They're scary, they're Larry...
They'll take over the world
They'll catalog the world
They'll overthrow the earth
They'll monetize the earth
Don't they see the writing on the Google+ Wall? (Score:4, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
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.
Bitcoin? (Score:2)
Google Bitcoins? What?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Did they steal this idea... (Score:2)
...from Emperor Norton [wikipedia.org]?
and? (Score:2)
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? (Score:4, Interesting)
Ah, Gooney sounds kinda lame, I'd have went for street rep instead and called it G-Money.
Would you accept google's governance? (Score:4, Interesting)
At least google gives us useful free stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
But they do buy it from everyone.
One requirement (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Ripple Monetary System (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
I also tried to build a currency based on Ripple [ghettowine.com] once, but I couldn't remember where I'd hidden it all at when the hangover wore off.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ripple Monetary System (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Oh, I wouldn't bet on it. I'm in Norway, not Sweden but both fairly socialist countries that depend heavily on income taxes and sales taxes. Strictly speaking you can use cash most everywhere, but it's getting more and more biased against it. The last item they've been pushing is electronic tickets for local buses, because they don't want neither bus drivers nor ticket machines getting robbed. You get heavy price incentives to use electronic cards or to pay over your cell phone - there's no such thing as an anonymous cell phone here by the way, that was outlawed quite a few years ago so it's all traceable back to me and there's no such thing as an anonymous debit cards either, they're all registered to your unique id. If I pay any person or company over 10k NOK - about $1800 - in cash during a year, I can be charged as co-conspirator in their tax fraud if they cheat on their taxes for doing nothing other than paying in cash.
Another example is the employee cafeteria, there are several I know of that no longer take cash, either taking just plastic directly or through their own cards you can only charge with plastic. Even if you're a homeless crack addict you don't get food coupons anymore, you get an electronic card only valid in the grocery store - but not for beer. Honestly if it wasn't for a generation of elderly who insist on using cash I'm pretty sure we'd have pushed through a cashless society, because while we're not so heavy on the organized crime and terrorism propaganda, there's plenty of the tax fraud, black economy, anti-robbery propaganda with a good smear of if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Community currencies [wikipedia.org] are as alive and well as they've ever been.
The backers of the Liberty Dollar broke the law by revaluing their currency to something other than the US dollar. That the authorities took a dim view of breaking the law should neither be a surprise or be seen as evidence of some dark
They Used That One Thing They Never Use? (Score:2)
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!
Canadian Tire Money (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that would be a good use of digital currency. A big thick wad of Canadian Tire money only comes up to a few dollars.
Re: (Score:2)
Canadian Tire is switching to a loyalty card/rewards system. They'll still take the funny money, but you'll get a better return with the card: http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.html?id=6156461 [vancouversun.com]
Why legal issues? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because there are many laws in many nations one what can be called currency. You can't just start a new currency and expect it to interact with the current financial system. There are a sh*t load of other laws and regulations, especially if you are engaging in deposit taking or credit lending. You need the appropriate approvals and must conduct your self like other financial institutions do.
Microsoft can get away with points because it's only a one way exchange. You buy MS points to get stuff on the X-B
Re: (Score:3)
You can not convert MS points back into cash.
I beg to differ [ebay.com]
Microsoft Points is just like any other currency. Microsoft can create money from nothing by just "printing" points. There is an exchange rate for the points to other currencies. I really don't see the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
You can not convert it back to cash, only for products in a MS store. You can not convert those points into Euro's, or Austrailian dollars on any currency exchange. Your local grocery store is not legally obliged to accept your MS points to pay for purchases as stipulated by government laws determining what legal tender is. Central banks do not recognize nor accept MS points as capital. The bank teller will laugh in your face if you try and deposit MS points.
Face it, it is not a currency and any one who
Don't online games do something like this? (Score:2)
I don't play any of those games. But, as I understand it, WoW, and 2nd life, have their own sort of money. In fact, some people make their living from that stuff.
Re:This company scares me more and more (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
after that, how is a transferrable 50 dollar walmart gift card, which can be traded for anything walmart sells (read: anything) any different from walmart issued cash?
Re: (Score:2)
You can, silly. They generally have an ID number behind a foil seal that you can use to the balance online.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually "Don't be evil", which some Googlers seem to interpret as a loophole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This company scares me more and more (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is government-issued currency any more legitimate?
Because you can exchange it for goods that don't originate from said company. Much like cash as opposed to a gift card.
Re: (Score:2)
This didn't sound like scrip though. Maybe I misinterpreted the article.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Right, what I was asking is: Why it is scary if a company does this, but not if it is a government?
Re: (Score:2)
Because the government is supposed to act in the best interest of its subjects.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok... now take my question in the context of what I was responding to.
Re: (Score:2)
Because every store is required by law to accept it.
Re:This company scares me more and more (Score:4, Informative)
I am not a lawyer, but IMHO no private entity that is not a creditor is "required by law" to accept dollars as payment, either physically as actual notes or as the unit of a promissory note (check). It would be business suicide for a US store to _not_ accept them, but there's plenty of precedent for businesses not accepting physical notes, and pure barter is still quite legal.
Note that I said creditor - the rule of 'all DEBTS public and private' comes in to play when there's a debt owed. Attempting to buy something does not create a debt, so that rule does not apply. Eating in a restaurant that collects payment after the meal DOES create a debt, therefore they must accept currency as payment.
This article [amazon.com] has a good discussion.
This guy [quickanddirtytips.com] gets it close, but confuses creditor with seller.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
That actually sounds like an intriguing way of dealing with passports. Outlandish for sure and meant to be satirical but intriguing none the less. We get into most foreign countries with far less background check unless we're traveling far and need a visa and even then they don't check that far, usually criminal records. I know /. is a hardcore paranoia crowd about what they look at on the internet (I can only imagine they must all be looking at giraffe porn...such long necks). But imagine an instant ba