The Royal Canadian Mint just announced a new alternative to BitCoin

[marcus_of_augustus]

Wouldn't that be "got Dwollared"

as in "Trade Hill got Dwollared when their merchant account containing hundreds of thousands was frozen"

[1713880234]

1713880234

[1713880234]

1713880234

[1713880234]

1713880234

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Wouldn't that be "got Dwollared"

as in "Trade Hill got Dwollared when their merchant account containing hundreds of thousands was frozen"

Yep, but opt to pull away for the "got" part since psy wrote the following:

I just want to see if they keep the no-chargeback policy or if they will pull a Dwolla...

As I've stated, it has a nice ring to it: pull-a-Dwolla or pulla-dwolla or Pull-a-Dwolla.

~Bruno~

[Jointops420]

Maybe we could offer merged mining for the lulz.

[Stephen Gornick]

I just want to see if they keep the no-chargeback policy or if they will pull a Dwolla...

The MintChip technology only supports non-reversible transactions.  If you notice in the flow diagram though there is only one arrow on the "Redeem MintChip".   There actually should be another arrow the other direction indicating the redemption payment that is made in CADs or other currency to the MintChip acceptor's bank account.  If "chargebacks" occur, they will come in either blacklisting Acceptors or in clawing back redemptions sent to the bank accounts.

If the merchant gets left holding the bag after accepting "bad" funds in a transaction using MintChip then the merchant is going to adjust and not accept MintChip payments from questionable people, or to start requiring identity information from the buyer, etc.   Then that starts a chain reaction so maybe who knows if they'ld start doing that.

What will make all the difference is knowing if there will be restrictions on how these are issued (i.e., can be bought anonymously) and if there are restrictions on their use.   If the MintChip can be sold from the broker without requiring identification and there are no restrictions on its use (e.g., if you happen to find a MintChip on the sidewalk you are allowed to keep it), then the MintChip becomes a different animal.

[niko]

Not sure why there is so much negativity in the comments here. This is great news for Bitcoin. Certainly MintChip is completely different in technical terms, but it shares some attributes with Bitcoin as far as a lay person or a judge or government bureaucrat is concerned. If you look at this picture



you will notice that Bitcoin essentially provides a secure, decentralized way of doing what the top (minting) and bottom (p2p transactions) of the picture represent, while eliminating the centre. If this picture is legal, so is Bitcoin.

[Rothgar]

Is anyone thinking about the inevitable mint chip cloning. 

A successful clone would need a private key, but maybe a virus could harvest these. 

Double spending shouldn't be an issue, as there is a random code placed in every transaction, if two transactions have the same random code then only one will be accepted. 

[guruvan]

It just has a serious ring of big brother wanting to know about the small cash I transfer, and about potentially wanting to use that evidence against me (whether I have committed a crime or not). Seems pretty innocuous in Canada. I doubt it would be here in the US. It would go right up there with other choice things like the NDAA and the Patriot Act. Even if the government can't wiretap your financial transactions through MintChip, I'm sure it would be excellent for forensics. I'm sure all the hidden APIs will be super fun for LE.

I am skeptical of the "anonymity" - my normal presumption would be that there is ID involved in the transfer of funds via the Trusted Broker from your bank or from cash to a MintChip.

I really like the fact that it looks like it may be able to be used exactly like cash. I owe you $20K, I bring a microSD card w/ a MintChip w/ the funds, and give it to you by hand.

The other thing that may be a significant issue for this is that if it can be used in the way I describe above, it will start to trade at its own value, which would fluctuate with the value of the currency used in it, but not directly. One of the two (paper or chip) will likely start to trade at a discount to the other. (Depending on the market forces which would be dictated by the preferred means of the vendors, and the ease of anonymous acquisition of the chips).

The chip dollar and the paper dollar may have the same face value, but if you can't spend one much (likely paper) then you'll pay extra to get the other. Right now, Paper USD trades at a premium to digital USD (most of the time)  that credit/debit card money you spend is usually 1:1, if you take the same card  to the bank, there is a fee - the paper is trading a little higher than the digits.

TBH, my negativity is more rooted in the chip than the specifics of the rest of the model, which I said i thought I like. I especially like the psychology of what this type of "authorized" technology does for future bitcoin adoption.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Not sure why there is so much negativity in the comments here. This is great news for Bitcoin. Certainly MintChip is completely different in technical terms, but it shares some attributes with Bitcoin as far as a lay person or a judge or government bureaucrat is concerned. If you look at this picture



you will notice that Bitcoin essentially provides a secure, decentralized way of doing what the top (minting) and bottom (p2p transactions) of the picture represent, while eliminating the centre. If this picture is legal, so is Bitcoin.

I believe many here echo the same sentiment, it's just that's there's so much information to currently digest, users are just expressing the myriad aspects of MintChip, some of which involve negative components.

~Bruno~

[Phinnaeus Gage]

It just has a serious ring of big brother wanting to know about the small cash I transfer, and about potentially wanting to use that evidence against me (whether I have committed a crime or not). Seems pretty innocuous in Canada. I doubt it would be here in the US. It would go right up there with other choice things like the NDAA and the Patriot Act. Even if the government can't wiretap your financial transactions through MintChip, I'm sure it would be excellent for forensics. I'm sure all the hidden APIs will be super fun for LE.

I am skeptical of the "anonymity" - my normal presumption would be that there is ID involved in the transfer of funds via the Trusted Broker from your bank or from cash to a MintChip.

I really like the fact that it looks like it may be able to be used exactly like cash. I owe you $20K, I bring a microSD card w/ a MintChip w/ the funds, and give it to you by hand.

The other thing that may be a significant issue for this is that if it can be used in the way I describe above, it will start to trade at its own value, which would fluctuate with the value of the currency used in it, but not directly. One of the two (paper or chip) will likely start to trade at a discount to the other. (Depending on the market forces which would be dictated by the preferred means of the vendors, and the ease of anonymous acquisition of the chips).

The chip dollar and the paper dollar may have the same face value, but if you can't spend one much (likely paper) then you'll pay extra to get the other. Right now, Paper USD trades at a premium to digital USD (most of the time)  that credit/debit card money you spend is usually 1:1, if you take the same card  to the bank, there is a fee - the paper is trading a little higher than the digits.

TBH, my negativity is more rooted in the chip than the specifics of the rest of the model, which I said i thought I like. I especially like the psychology of what this type of "authorized" technology does for future bitcoin adoption.

Are we talking about "anonymity" or "privacy" for, remember, David Birch is a judge in this endeavor? Review the following video to see what I mean. What I'm in reference to is in the beginning, but take the time to re-watch the full video if it's been a while since you've last view it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhPZv8nOq5o

~Bruno~

[cbeast]

It just has a serious ring of big brother wanting to know about the small cash I transfer, and about potentially wanting to use that evidence against me (whether I have committed a crime or not). Seems pretty innocuous in Canada. I doubt it would be here in the US. It would go right up there with other choice things like the NDAA and the Patriot Act. Even if the government can't wiretap your financial transactions through MintChip, I'm sure it would be excellent for forensics. I'm sure all the hidden APIs will be super fun for LE.

I am skeptical of the "anonymity" - my normal presumption would be that there is ID involved in the transfer of funds via the Trusted Broker from your bank or from cash to a MintChip.

I really like the fact that it looks like it may be able to be used exactly like cash. I owe you $20K, I bring a microSD card w/ a MintChip w/ the funds, and give it to you by hand.

The other thing that may be a significant issue for this is that if it can be used in the way I describe above, it will start to trade at its own value, which would fluctuate with the value of the currency used in it, but not directly. One of the two (paper or chip) will likely start to trade at a discount to the other. (Depending on the market forces which would be dictated by the preferred means of the vendors, and the ease of anonymous acquisition of the chips).

The chip dollar and the paper dollar may have the same face value, but if you can't spend one much (likely paper) then you'll pay extra to get the other. Right now, Paper USD trades at a premium to digital USD (most of the time)  that credit/debit card money you spend is usually 1:1, if you take the same card  to the bank, there is a fee - the paper is trading a little higher than the digits.

TBH, my negativity is more rooted in the chip than the specifics of the rest of the model, which I said i thought I like. I especially like the psychology of what this type of "authorized" technology does for future bitcoin adoption.

Are we talking about "anonymity" or "privacy" for, remember, David Birch is a judge in this endeavor? Review the following video to see what I mean. What I'm in reference to is in the beginning, but take the time to re-watch the full video if it's been a while since you've last view it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhPZv8nOq5o

~Bruno~

I have a feeling this is a very bad thing. Essentially, it will privatize the entire Canadian money supply as a for-profit no-bid contract. Privacy and free-trade are likely to be the first casualties.

[niko]

[Phinnaeus Gage]

The only way to improve upon this image is if you had another Financial Institution image on the far left, move the the other one further right, then link them with a double arrow, thus creating value among themselves.

Just thought of something else. Have a faded dotted line from below, linked to them, representing a bone (donation) tossed their way for provided the rest of us entertainment.

~Bruno~

[RodeoX]

the thing is mintchip is just not as good as Bitcoin. It lacks some of the most attractive aspects of BTC. 
But when is a movie with "2" in the title ever as good as the first?

[casascius]

I wonder how this is a whole lot different than the smart card on my university ID I used more than a decade ago in the vending machines?

It seems like this'll make a great complement to Bitcoin, as well as legitimizing it greatly.  I highly doubt it will replace Bitcoin.  Just too much stuff different.

I am guessing if your chip stops working (e.g. takes an ESD hit), you're screwed, your money's gone.

And if someone cracks the chip and extracts even a single chip's private key, seems the whole thing fails.  As I understand it, Canada has got some seriously good reverse engineers of chips, judging by the sophisticated means they use to crack the regular revisions of the US satellite TV smart cards... cracked mainly because that's the only way to get the programming that's simply not offered in Canada.

[LightRider]

My initial reaction was fear. My current reaction is laughter.

[luv2drnkbr]

This is HUGE for bitcoin.  Anything that legitimizes and introduces people to purely digital currency is good for bitcoin.  It will expand the market of people who can come into contact with bitcoin.  This is a good thing.  And exchange between mintwhatever and bitcoin will also be very easy to set up.  God I hope pokerstars allows cashouts to mintship.  I'm losing about 20% every fucking cashout!

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

If i don't see source code posted anywhere, then i don't treat a digital currency seriously.

This is a good thing for bitcoin. Canada's backing will put MintChip into many stores as a payment option. Exchange between MintChip and Bitcoin will be easier than any other fiat currency with its irrevocable electronic transactions, anyone will be able to start an exchange without having to rely on paypal or other processors. Essentially we could end up with a system like:
MintChip = checking account
Bitcoin = savings account

+1  very much what i was going to say. this is epic for BTC!

Also, +1.

MintChip itself is nothing like Bitcoin, but its existence is good for Bitcoin.

[benjamindees]

Obviously the important feature here is the ability to make transfers without access to a central clearing house.  That's an advantage over Bitcoin.  And it doesn't seem that useful in a first world country.  I'm guessing this is designed for export, and will be aimed at developing countries with poor telecom/internet infrastructure.

Since Canada is set to maintain a huge export trade in natural resources, perhaps they are looking to collect enough foreign currencies to back this system, and parlay that into providing currency services globally.  Seems risky.

Which means they have likely already planned to have US military support.  So, is this the Dollar replacement?  Being beta-tested on those willing heathen socialist Canadians?  Chipcoin?  666, mark of the beast?  Do we all get one implanted?  And when it runs out of memory from too many transactions, we get to visit our friendly local "trusted broker" to have the contents downloaded for analysis and the transaction count reset?  Perhaps with a few extra chipcoins thrown his way, my trusted broker can be convinced to overlook some of my transactions, wink wink.  Perhaps he could even be convinced to up my chipcoin balance a bit.

I don't know.  I don't like the way this sounds.  It seems too ambitious.  Even the video showed all the transactions in USD.  And the development is aimed at Americans as well.  Normally, co-opting the US Dollar gets you liberated or thrown in jail.  Something is fishy.

[ribuck]

The big win for MintChip is ease of use, which may lead to ubiquity. In every other respect, Bitcoin beats it.

[apetersson]

The big win for MintChip is ease of use, which may lead to ubiquity. In every other respect, Bitcoin beats it.

not yet. currently there is basically no ease of use. in the two demo apps if you want to pay someone you have to download a ValueRequestMessage which is a file minimum 200 bytes (can be even larger) then the user has to import it to his MitChip App and generate a signed response. send the file over to the merchant. merchant imports it.

of course in practice this will be significantly easier (NFC, QR Code, URL, callbacks), if all MintChip standardize on a way to exchange ValueRequestMessage+ValueMessage but right now Bitcoin usability is OK-ish and MintChip is abysmal.