 Thank you. Freedom begins with your wallet. If you can't do what you want to with your own property without someone watching every move you make, recording, and thank you, recording and approving, then it's not really your property, is it? We're going to talk about anonymous digital economies and what it takes to make them actually work. This is not just about digital cash because that's really not enough. It's a much broader issue. When we got access to strong cryptography, a lot of us were saying, well now this is going to keep us, keep our business private from the bureaucratic nose. But it didn't really work out that way. What did we get out of it? We got anonymous email, digital gold currencies, e-gold, gold money, e-billion, DMT. Everybody know what DMT is? Digital Monetary Trust, perhaps one of the most sophisticated and anonymous and successful of the digital payment systems. Anyhow, it didn't work out that way. None of these have become as successful and widespread as we'd like to become a real solution because, well, there's nobody really cared. A lot of people don't care about privacy and they're too specialized, too limited. These limitations well down to a couple of things. They are a central control and a fee for service model. So what is a good model for anonymous commerce? Physical cash, what's good about it? The advantages to physical cash are it doesn't know who you are. It doesn't know where it's been. It doesn't remember where it's been. It doesn't care how it's being used. So what if we can find some way to abstract these attributes and carry them over into the digital world? One way to do that gives us four attributes, some things that I like to think of as the earth, air, fire and water of anonymous commerce. They are identity, value, communications and locale. The first thing is very straightforward. Identity, public key pair and the name string. It gives us some focus for being able to establish a reputation and be able to establish ownership over stuff. Value, digital bear certificates, digital gold coins, some way to store and transfer value. Communications, a way to coordinate and rendezvous for exchange of value. The locale is special. Locale is the thing that makes physical cash such a good medium for anonymous commerce. It gives us a place to rendezvous. It gives us the inverse of that, which is a means to privacy. It gives us a place to store our stuff and it gives us a table where we can put stuff down and pick it up and exchange it. These four things, they fit together into what we're calling the farmers market model of anonymous commerce. This is doing business conversationally in locales. Example of this, this is like, say, I want to buy some apples. I go somewhere, I know that fruit is being sold and I say, anybody got any apples? Someone says, yeah, I have apples, three quattles lose a pound. So I look at them, I say, those are good apples. I put down my quattles, I pick up the apples and I'm on my way. This is financial anarchy. There's no structure, no rules. Some people think that financial anarchy is dangerous. I'd like to put forth what I call ladies' law, which is security times freedom equals a constant. Security times freedom equals a constant. There are ways to mitigate risks in anonymous transactions, as we'll see. I'd like to hand things over to Andrew now who's going to talk about doing business in anonymous economies. Let me know if my volume is too high or too low or whatever. Wave at me or something. Yeah, good. All right. Excellent. I want to go back and talk just a little overview here for doing business. We're talking about here a space, a new place, something we're in the paper calling it Oz. Some people have called it the free digital economy, free cyberspace, whatever name you pick. It's in effect a new territory. The real issue is here about doing business here, not just walling off an area in cyberspace. We do that with PGP, with SSL, with various types of encryption. We essentially are walling off a private area in cyberspace. Now, we've been able to do this for a pretty good number of years. What do we do in this free zone in cyberspace? Well, we really want to conduct business there. Business is how we survive. We have to get money. We have to trade for food, whatever. This is how we survive. We want to do business in this area. Now, the real issue is with doing business in this free zone that we're fencing off. A real issue is timing. We have now with the internet and with encryption, the ability that we have the situation consider this a new continent. That's really kind of a bad example because every time we put up some encryption, create a tunnel or whatever we do, we're walling off a little mini kiosk in cyberspace. It's essentially we're creating our own little private turf and we create it and then we dissolve it and then we create it and dissolve it. So the new continent is not really a good example but it's quite as close as I can give you right now. So what really the issue is is timing. When you have a new territory of whatever sort, there are different waves of people that come in. The American frontier is one of the most recent so it's probably a good one to use it as an example. But the first guys there are scouts, traders, you know, kind of wild mountain men who go in and search out the new territory. Then we bring in farmers who dare to come in and fence off some territory and begin to use it. Then we have all the businesses that come in to supply the farmers with fence posts and wire and markets for selling their goods and ways of moving their goods in and out. So this is developing also in that basic pattern. And the end that I'm going to get to is that I think we're in a really good position right now that a lot of the initial work has been done and we're beginning to at least approach something of a critical mass. When there are enough people that are willing to fence off areas and do business there, once you reach a critical mass, more people keep coming because there are advantages to doing business this way towards living this way. Now, about the time that John Perry Barlow put out his Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace, there were a bunch of people, myself among them, who began to theorize what would cyberspace be like? How could we make this a real world? How would it work? And actually spend time working on these models and see how they would work. And it's been very interesting, there's a whole discipline called Property Rights Theory, I won't go into it now. But it essentially predicts how this happens and it has really been very interesting to watch. Some of the first people that came in began fencing off areas in cyberspace and using them for what I jokingly call the freedom wackos, myself being one of them. And these are people who used to be called crypto anarchists, now generally they call themselves free market anarchists, but people who really believed in basic freedom that all coercion is immoral. So these were some of the first people there and then there were the sci-fi guys who read Diamond Age and some of these other books and said, oh, I want to build something that looks kind of like that. Oh my god, we can maybe do this. Also very interestingly, there were a bunch of religious people, fewer but a fair amount of them. Turns out there are different contradictory things in the Bible. One part in Romans more or less justifies government and rulership. The other part in the Gospels basically says that all governments belong to Satan. And there are religious people who hold to that one more than the one in Romans and who essentially say we ought to obey God rather than men all the way. And these were some of the first people also to come into this free zone. These were people who really cared about it for non-monetary reasons. Then we had the gambling and porn people come in who wanted a certain measure of anonymity, wanted to fence off their area and not get in trouble for what they were doing. Some of them were kind of ugly people but that's the way it goes. We had scammers who came in because it's an easy way to move assets in and out. If it's a private area, it's like a black hole to move money in and out of. So we did have a few of those bastards there too. The offshore finance people wanted to come in and use these type of areas because they're making money somewhere else and they don't want the tax bug in their place to know. So we have these people coming and going out of free cyberspace. It's a real strange mix. And only recently have businesses really begun to make money. I know one in particular is in the footnotes of our paper, Metro Pipe. They run a tunneler. They have a virtual private network from your machine to theirs. I believe it's SSH. And then a proxy from there out into the internet. And it's essentially a privacy service and they keep no logs and all that good stuff. They don't check your IP address. It all works off embedded encryption which is beyond me but I understand what they're doing. But they're actually making money. So there are people that are now businesses that are there that are starting to make money. I believe and I could be mistaken but I think HushMail has been making money for a period of time. There have been other e-mail services that have yet to mail vault which is terrific for PGP ease of use. Your grandma can run PGP with mail vault. But they have yet to make money out of it. I think HushMail is actually making money. I could be wrong. The issue here is that we're kind of coming close to something that resembles critical mass. Is the timing right? I think so. Who can tell? It's very hard to know exactly when the critical moment is. But somebody is making money here. The guys at MetroPipe are making a living doing this. I believe the guys at HushMail are making a living doing this. So there is something going on and at some point it becomes a critical mass and there's a room for lots and lots of people to make a lot of money in this because it's not really just a separate little area to do a little secret things. It's a whole separate civilization when you get all done with it. So it's a very interesting, very interesting thing. I'm interested in this from the philosophical standpoint. I'm not a coder. If I write a batch file that works I'm having a very happy day. I don't do that type of stuff. But I'm interested in this from a different standpoint So another thing that was missing in not making this available. Am I doing okay on time? Okay. That means I'm not. But okay. One of the other elements that was missing, and we actually mentioned this in our paper a little bit, is a philosophy. All of you who do this type of stuff you understand that it's hard sometimes to explain why you do this and why it's important to people who have no experience in understanding, you know, you're hacking, you're doing something wrong with you. It's hard to explain because we're actually coming from a different philosophical base than most of those people. And what you do seems to them to be odd, and maybe wrong or maybe something bad about it. And there are some hackers who are assholes too, but there are. You know, there's bad guys in every group. But really what was necessary for this is a new philosophy, a new way of looking at the world, because essentially we're creating a new type of world. And there's a book that we, you can see it in the footnotes, that really in my opinion sets the new philosophy. It's called The Lodging of Wayfaring Men. It's available. Sean Hastings has put it up on his site. He wrote a preface to an electronic edition and put it up on his site. Highly recommended because it really, if this book is right and I think it is, it says that the philosophy of our world is not only morally defensive, it's morally superior. So it's a really interesting read. I'm running late, aren't I? Okay. I'll stop for now. I'm going to say a few things about trust and reputation before, because it's such a central issue for anonymous economics. Without reputation, there can't be any trust. Without trust, there can't be any commerce. And this applies to both anonymous commerce and also to business in the world of transparent banks and know your customer and coercive governments. What we referred to in our paper is the dark side. To have an effective reputation management system, you need really three things. You need some convenient, easy way to input reputation information to the system. In our example software, that can be done with a click or two. You need an easy, convenient way to be able to create a reputation of some other num in the system, and also that can be done with a click or two. Finally, you need to have a useful unit of measurement for trust. Not just an abstract, relative number without units. It needs to be something that you can use. The unit that we chose was the probability that the subject will perform as agreed per gold gram at risk or dollar or whatever unit. We chose gold grams because it's so easy to normalize other currencies and transactions to gold. So let's say I believe you would rip me off for a gold kilogram. There's no doubt about it. The probability is 1.0 that you will rip me off for a gold kilogram. So by that measure, it's probability of .001 that you would rip me off for a gram. So my trust for you in this system is .999. This is not a silly number. It's a useful number. You can take this number and plug it into a simple system and come up with a value for how much collateral I need to require from you for a loan or how much bond for some activity or whatever. And this is the same system that insurance companies use to plug in accident statistics and come up with your insurance premium. So it's a meaningful number. If you can express trust as a number, then some other properties of number can be applied to it. You know, the high school math stuff, distributive commutative associative and all that. Perhaps the most useful one of these things is that distributive principle. So you can distribute risk in a transaction. You can distribute it over NIMS. You can distribute it over transactions. You can distribute it over time. And this way you reduce the risk in a transaction. For example, let's say I want to exchange $1,000 for quat lose. And I don't know you. You don't know me. I don't know where you live. I don't know your real name. How can I do business with you safely without getting ripped off? So in this scenario, at least it's worth a dollar to me just to find out if I can trust you or not. So we have a dollar's worth of trust available. We can pass this dollar's worth of trust back and forth by conducting our transaction a dollar at a time. A thousand many transactions in a few milliseconds later. We've managed to transact a substantial sum of money without risking any more than a dollar at a time. Sometimes these things break down. Trust, I mean, fairness is a subjective judgment. There are bad people in the world. And sometimes these tricks will break down. And then we need some way to get justice. And justice in an anonymous world is every bit as difficult as trust in an anonymous world. And Andre's going to talk about that because that's his specialty. Okay. Earlier I mentioned the fact that when you really develop areas like this, when they really develop, it ends up being not so much a little area to do something, but with different civilization actually. People have talked about this for a long time. Actually, you know, various radicals and free thinkers have talked about this since the beginning of the agricultural revolution when theft and rulership became paying gigs. But the stumbling back to a lot of our libertarian theorists and the new nation people was justice. Justice is a very important commodity. And it's a very difficult one to supply. The usual models of justice require the strong man standing in the town square holding the biggest sword. And he's the one who ensures justice. If you cheat somebody, he can come to the strong man with the sword and make you pay. That's a you know, that's very simplified, but that really is the modern model of justice. The sovereign with the sword who can make everyone else obey. That also turns everybody into something of a surf because no one can fight the strong man with the sword. In any event, the cyberspace model is different. There is no physical force. There's no physical force possible. And there's no way to centralize force in one hand. It just really can't work. So you have to come up with a different model of justice that will actually work in this way. Several years ago, I think it was 99, several of us in the old laissez-faire city project, Rest in Peace. We began working on this arrogantly, admittedly. But we determined to try to figure out a model where this could work. We researched things like the old common law. At the beginning of the common law, there really wasn't centralized force, but not centralized. So it was an interesting model. Plus the common law is really an exceptional piece of law. It's better than civil law. It's better than most modern positive law. That's another story. We also looked at something that existed in late Middle Ages called the Lex Mercatoria or the law merchant. I won't bore you with the details. But it was essentially a form of justice among merchants that there was a law. If a guy was a bad merchant, no one took him and threw him in jail, but he couldn't be a merchant anymore either because no one would do business with him. And he went quickly out of business and lost a lot of money. As a result, they pretty much were good boys and played by the rules. And it worked really well. There are other examples of Irish law and Icelandic law at various times. But those involved a great deal of force at times, and I really like that. The other one is Jewish law, because this was groups of people who had no physical force really to use. And not only that, but they were living in really difficult circumstances, most of the time as outcast or semi-outcast, or at least not the chosen, you know, preferred people. So they have, and plus there's a rich history of all this stuff. It's a lot of religion mixed in. You have to separate it out carefully. But it was a group of circumstances and ideas. In the end of this, we came up with a model that involved two basic things. One is protection before the transaction, and one is addressing grievances after the transaction. Before, we had the ideas of escrows, of bondsmen, of reputation management, of reputation checking, and it all gets in the paper we go into in a lot greater depth. There's webs of interaction of distributed trust, distributed bonding, distributed liability. It works really interestingly. And on the backside, there's first of all alternative dispute resolution, which is used in a whole lot of places now already. Arbitration, mediation, those type of things with a trusted arbitrator. And the other is enforcement. In enforcement, it turns out that we looked at three particular things. One is a damage to reputation. Two is ostracism. And ostracism is really more potent than you think it is, because ostracism essentially is outlawed now. We call it discrimination. There is real discrimination, people who are pricks, but I'm not talking about that. Ostracism, if you're a bad actor, I say, hey, this guy is a bad, I suggest everybody ostracize him. Here's what happened. He did this. If you can't do business, you're suffering a hell of a big hurt. Okay? So it turns out to be a very effective mechanism. And the other final one is outlawry, which is a strange old term. In the old days it meant if you declared an outlaw, essentially the justice system of that day and time, whatever it was, said, whoever screws with Joe the bastard, we won't hold him liable. Okay? So if Joe's declared an outlaw, he's a jerk. He's done bad things. And if you go into Joe's place and steal his horse and whatever else, you won't get in trouble for theft. Now, obviously this is the type of mechanism that we have to use pretty carefully with limits and provisors and all that stuff. But it actually does work as a model. Okay. Um... I won't go into detail. This model also applies to physical space, you know, to physical transactions, to physical enforcement of things, but that's a totally different thing and it's more complicated and I don't want to get into it. When we're talking about cyberspace, we don't have to. We're talking about commercial transactions in cyberspace. We don't have to deal with with policemen and security guards and all that. We don't have to do that and it's very convenient. This is much easier and much better. Now, the great thing about this is that we tried it and it worked. We had a community of a few hundred people granted they were probably less bastards in this community per capita than in the general community at large, but we had our share of them and we didn't plan on doing this right away. I had theorized that some of my friends had helped me theorize it but we didn't realize we have to put it into action so damn soon. But we did and there were a number of things that happened, the number of disputes, the number of problems and it turns out that it worked really, really well. It actually faced what was probably the worst challenge. There was a little private community doing commerce. It was essentially a type of thing we're talking about but it was a community, not individualized little kiosks and the guy who owned the community turned out to be one of the least moral guys around. He also happened to own everything and have more money than anybody else. So when you make a model like this people say, well, what if? And what if this and what if this and what if this? Well, he really fit almost all of the big what ifs. He had more money, more power, he had more programmers working for him than anyone else. We filed, we saw what he did. I was considered that I had a reputation for honesty. I went, I investigated, I went in, I filed reports of what happened, what he did, exactly what I saw. Here's the evidence. We ostracized this guy. He had a leave town and he was the most powerful guy in town. So this really does work. Now, does my model with two or three hundred people translate to two or three million? Probably, I think it does. Maybe I'm arrogant, maybe it won't but I think it does and we really did try it and it worked better than we thought it would. So, you know, we don't have enough data to say, categorically this is the way of the future, this will work but the first batch of data looks pretty damn good. Okay. How are we doing on time? Five. Oh, I got time. Okay, good. In this model justice is pay per use. You pay when you need an arbiter, when you need a mediator. We had a lot of commercial disputes, mediations, arbitrations and every single one of them resolved moderately well to excellently well and people when there was a published report that this is what happened people fell in line. If they didn't people said very bad things about them. They accused them of undermining the community and the safety of everybody which was true and brought them very quickly into line. It's interesting that this is pay per use. In other words, when you need an arbitrator you hire him. The you don't have to as in the traditional system. One of the arguments they say well this won't work, I say this isn't perfect. No, it's not perfect. There are things that could happen wrong but as compared to what? In the traditional justice system it's full of problems and the state who is supposed to be enforcing and creating this justice system for you, first of all takes a hell of a lot of your money by force and you have to pay $200 to a lawyer anyway when it comes time. So it really is financially this model is much much much better. The problem is that the state won't leave you alone but that's another story. But it works out exceptionally well. One of the things we had to do is we had to build this as we went. There was theory, we had talked about it, we had plans in place but when it actually came time to do it we hadn't expected problems to pop up that fast. But the truth is any time you do business a couple hundred people misunderstand. People don't understand the agreements and they're unhappy this guy was late he says well I was sick I couldn't help it and there's all sorts of things and you need resolutions to problems. So we had to build it as we go. I want to just tell a couple things about what exists in this realm now. First there was a series of articles that were done justice with our force they're kind of old slightly dated but I mean I'm biased I wrote them I thought they were pretty good. The other thing that was done is we built a document that is called the Common Economic Protocol a shameless ripoff from the Diamond Age. But it's the set of common law principles it's I think it's 27 basic principles and this says what justice is, what is just, what is fair. And this was taken from some of the very best legal texts, some of the very best legal minds. From the old common law we have as an appendix to this I forget how many couple hundred maxims of law from the old common law that have been slightly edited to be applicable in a realm where there is no centralized force. So we have this document it's up there's a link to it in our paper too. Okay there's a link to it in the paper. And the last thing I want to add is very interesting I get around to conferences sometimes. As I say I'm not a program I'm a theorist I'm a a guesser at what might be good in the future. Very interestingly there are more academics than you would guess who think this is very interesting and a good idea. There are professors of law there are professors of economics there's associations of economists who are very warm to ideas like this and who are very interested there are a couple young economists that are doing a lot of work along this line. So this is not just for you know the freedom records like me that we started. A lot of academics are interested in this and actually there are several books have been written by professors of law departments about this basic type of thing. It's really a fascinating field. It's really interesting and if I'm correct then it's really an interesting development right now that could be very profitable for a lot of people. Once this basic thing is formed our farmers model market our basic mechanisms for trading cash there's a lot of room for really interesting products and really valuable businesses I'll hand it back off. Last month I threw together a GUI that creates an environment much like what we're talking about here. It's concerned with what your granny sees when she goes to buy a Ming vase online and not so much with what goes on underneath the hood. There's no encryption no authentication it's just an experiment in how to conduct business in an anonymous environment. Unfortunately for some reason we couldn't get it loaded on Andrey's Linux box but no you don't get viruses but I can show a few high points of it here I hope so these things are these icons these are locales they represent places that can be identified by their name only and there are places where you can keep coins where you can meet people where you can buy and sell stuff these items these are identities they represent these are NIMS these two are NIMS I created this one is one that I copied from Andrey so that when I meet him online I can verify that compare the two and actually verify it it's actually you know let's say I wanted to sell those US dollars for plot lose like I was talking about before I would go to first of all I would the identity that I'm familiar with here and that has a reputation in currency exchange and I'll drop that on this locale and this is a place where normally we'd see other people right now I'm the only person here but I can pop a talk window and now whatever I say there will be seen by other people so I can say something like so who has plot lose for dollars and then someone else would come back and I would see their window pop up and say I've got plot lose and I'll sell them for a thousand dollars for 1100 plot lose or whatever and at that point here is a locale where I keep my US dollar coins and I can just move those over and when I do that he'll see them he's there presumably we don't have anybody there right now this USD locale and the garbage I put after it is a place nobody else knows the name of so nobody else can go there and pick up my coins but I can move my coins over here and whoever I'm dealing with can pick them up and if I say see I don't know this guy Andre I could check his reputation like this and this sent a message to a reputation server that I'm also running here and that came back with a record of stuff about how many transactions he's done the ones that people thought were successful and the ones people are griping about the number he sent that were good or bad and so forth I can look at that and say I sort of I guess I can trust this guy so otherwise I would have to use some kind of escrow arrangement for example and in this environment this is very primitive obviously if he was a bad guy he could just pick up my US dollar coins and run and I wouldn't mean anything I could do about it except file a negative reputation report about it but as it is if I'm happy with the exchange I can file a reputation report for him very easily here that says one, two, three, four hundred dollars worth and I'm happy with it and this went into the reputation server and now if I go back and look at that I might be able to see that it's already been done not quite so this is the beginning of a conversational way to conduct business in an anonymous world it has the elements of reputation management and it has the the elements of being able to exchange coins in an anonymous way the thing about this though anyone can define a currency of their own the question is like any kind of currency what's it worth will someone else believe in it or not a coin is a promise to pay it's almost a contract so if someone believes that they can redeem my coin for whatever it says it's good for a US dollar, a gold, a gram then it's good money if nobody knows me, if I don't have a reputation then it's not good money let's say I wanted to sell my car let's say I want to sell this Ming vase so I could take my Ming vase by well the historic place that has business in eyes and I can give him my Ming vase and he will make up a coin for he will make up a Ming vase coin for me and he will give it to me and now he's got the vase I've got the coin if I sell you that coin it's there's an implicit promise that you can take that coin back to the historic place and redeem it for a vase so this is how physical assets can enter the system and become a medium of exchange like gold, grams or US dollars this is a very broad topic this business of a practical, anonymous economic system and we've only been able to touch on the high points of it here if you're interested or you're still hungry read our paper there's 45 pages of it and we're talking about this stuff and a whole lot more detail and maybe a little bit more coherently some of the ideas we've talked about here are original many of them are not and I have to apologize for not drawing a very great distinction between the original stuff and the not so original stuff but we'd like if you leave here with nothing else three basic ideas one of them is that it is possible to construct an anonymous economy that is based on practical techniques to create and manage trust the other, second thing is the inadequacy of having just a collection of anonymous online services and the value of a decentralized peer-to-peer environment that creates the infrastructure for such services without constraining their form and the third thing we'd like to take out of here is that there is and the advantage is to having to using an unstructured conversational mode of transactions like you would when you go to a flea market or you go to the drug store or whatever that imitates the way that physical cash is used and is based on the concept of locales that's a wrap I want to conclude just with a couple quick things first of all in the paper which is on the disc is that paper available? in the paper at the end of it in the footnotes there is one service that is mentioned privacy.li that was an error to put that in there privacy.li has a pretty bad reputation amongst some people whose opinion I trust so I don't know I can't give you fact that they're bad guys but people who I know say so so I recommend not going to privacy.li the other thing is if you guys anyone is interested in pursuing this really in my happy dreams I see people building this basic community infrastructure that we're talking about almost on a Linux model where people contributing people getting reputation capital in return for doing good work on this stuff if anyone is interested in that Wavy has agreed to at least keep track of the names and possibly do more with them but he'll at least keep track of the names and we have the company I mentioned earlier Metropipe they have agreed to give a server space if we need it so anyone who's interested in really interested in this stuff send him an email and we're not promising anything but we'll try to keep everybody happy Wavy Hill at mailvault.com just the way it sounds so you know thanks for coming I don't know maybe I'm wrong but I work on this stuff a lot and this is really interesting stuff this is stuff you've read to your grandchildren about son I did that and believe me I know a lot of old people it's really nice to be happily smug when you're an old guy thanks guys we'll entertain some questions if they're bored the question is what if you got a guy who has a bad reputation how do you prevent him from re-entering with a new NIM and the answer is you can't but he enters in with a new NIM as zero and it turns out we had this exact problem and there were guys who after two or three notes posted by the new NIM they said hey he's so-and-so and they said are you sure this is the guy and when he analyzed their language and saw which words he misspelled the same words from NIM to NIM that he misspelled and it really turned out not to be as bad a problem as you might think it would be although there is certainly risk involved with it and that's just part of the game life has risk and we're giving up in this model a lot of bad things that we don't like politics for instance it's all commerce there are no involuntary transactions you only do what you agree to do no one forces anybody to do anything now if you think about the implications of that that's a really big deal so it's kind of a fair trade there's another half of that answer too and that is that no one will do business with you for any substantial sum of money unless you have a reputation and if you keep switching NIMs there's no chance to build up a reputation so you're nobody people will not trust nobody not with any substantial amount of money yeah the question is what if somebody gives you a bad a files a bad credit report on you essentially and it's not fair and it's not right yes there are several things you could do one is you would be allowed just as in a regular credit reporting agency to post a note saying you know Joe Jones is a prick and he filed this on me and it's not right and also you could get an arbiter to come in and analyze it for you and post an opinion and saying this was posted but I review the facts and in my opinion Joe Jones is wrong and Mike should not be considered to have this even though it shows on the record I want you to know another half of that answer is reputation reports on somebody it's going to show up right here okay bad sin or something like it it's immoral equivalent so it's going to be obvious that you make a habit of sending bad reports about people or you know it's a little harder to identify the person who if you're a crook who sets you up with a lot of good reputation reports this is a primitive system a better system would tell you a lot about a lot more you'd be able to find out a lot more detail about the reputation reports that are being filed by who and what kind big to paper there's a lot of possibilities about how a reputation system can be set up okay the question is what about DMT and talk a little bit about its problems DMT digital monetary trust or prank child of among others all in gravy he's not the only one but he's one of the main guys a digital monetary trust from a software standpoint and from a crypto standpoint as far as I understand it is excellent in terms of the basic machinery of operation it's super DMT has had a real problem dealing with customers and dealing with risk in the traditional economy a lot of the wise man said the guys who build a system like this shouldn't be in charge of running a system like this and that was really the problem with the DMT they still exist but they had problems their customer service sucked and that's putting it mildly they just didn't answer people they were rude they did not pull it off well they also ran into trouble interfacing with the banking system nothing that they really did wrong they have not they're not scammers they're not they're basically honest guys they just they didn't do well running the business it still exists and it may continue to exist for a while but they had problems dealing with customers did they answer your question? okay anything else? going once, going twice thank you