16 ms·

The Royal Canadian Mint just announced a new alternative to BitCoin

358 points by jonny_eh 15y ago

newman314 15y ago
Cash is anonymous. For any digital equivalent, I think this would be a key requirement to have.
msgr1 15y ago
And a software dev challenge to go with it where you can win $50K in gold bars. http://mintchipchallenge.com http://mintchipchallenge.com
- jonhernandez 15y ago
  Keep in mind the grand prize is $17K, it's approximately $50K spread out amongst all the winners.
  - midu 15y ago
    keep in mind that the prize is GOLD! As in: https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod%3D6&ix=nh&q=1+Gold+Wafer&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&authuser=0&ei=JW98T8SGH-aU0QHlrbztCw&biw=1706&bih=876&sei=J298T8eaM4Xa0QHFooyGDA#um=1&hl=en&authuser=0&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=10oz+gold&oq=10oz+gold&aq=f&aqi=g-s2g-ms1g-sS3g-msS1&aql=1&gs_l=img.3..0i10l2j0i5i10j0i10i24l3j0i5i10i24.9130l12625l2l12702l12l12l4l0l0l0l176l628l7j1l8l0.efis.1.&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=7cb965396a7d2414&biw=1706&bih=876 https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod%3D6&ix=n...
    - eli 15y ago
      That's cute, but also pretty inconvenient.
      - Foy 15y ago
        I find it ironic that a new e-currency designed to remove the need for cash or cumbersome online payment methods would reward it's challenge winners with probably the most cumbersome currency; gold bullion.
        ralfd 15y ago
        How would they get the 17K in Gold to you? Is it delivered via FedEx?
        lwat 15y ago
        Registered and insured mail
- ben1040 15y ago
  Also of note: according to the rules, it's open to Americans as well as Canadians: http://mintchipchallenge.com/rules http://mintchipchallenge.com/rules
  - oskarpearson 15y ago
    It's also open to corporations in the same locations from a quick glance on my side. My guess is that us foreigners could register a company in Delaware etc, and compete.
DanI-S 15y ago
This is interesting, although the dependency on hardware seems to open a large can of worms. Judging by the security overview[1], ensuring security of the hardware will be a complex and ongoing task. Bitcoin's use of p2p here saves a lot of fucking around, and cuts out a lot of middlemen. I wish there were a middle ground - institutionally backed bitcoin. I suppose there will be, once all the mining is done and ownership becomes consolidated. [1]http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht...
- loeg 15y ago
  Yeah, someone is going to figure out how to give themselves 20000 billion by working around the hardware and Mintchip will die real quick.
- AnthonyMouse 15y ago
  >I wish there were a middle ground - institutionally backed bitcoin. You could realistically do something almost as good as that without any reliance on either bitcoin or trusted computing, if you have a central authority. It actually seems pretty simple: You create a website where people can put in a credit card numbers and exchange money for secret (1000+ bit) numbers. The server keeps track of how much money is associated with each number. If you have a secret number, you can then go back and trade it back for money, or you can (anonymously) trade it for a different secret number -- which permanently invalidates the old one and assigns its value to the new one. This way when you want to spend money, you just disclose a secret number worth the value of the transaction in question to the payee, who immediately exchanges it for a new number that the payer doesn't know, and is thereby the only one who can subsequently trade it back in for government currency. (Of course, in the common case they just re-spend it in the same way as digital cash rather than redeeming it for government currency.) Make it so that you can specify values (i.e. trade in a $5 number for a $4.50 number and a $.50 number) and you create a situation where anyone can sell anything and receive a number as payment, and then buy something else and spend the number as currency, all while neither of the other parties or the payment processor have any idea who you are. Add to this the availability of VPN accounts that assign all users to a single public IP, so that users can route their SSL-encrypted transactions through an IP shared by thousands of others who do the same and thereby prevent the transaction processing server from associating transactions with IP addresses, and you have digital anonymous cash. The main disadvantage is that the secret numbers are exactly like cash, i.e. if someone gets hold of them then they've stolen your money, it's gone, and there is nothing you can do. But that's how cash works. And I kind of wish someone would implement something like this -- I mean think about all the money you could make just by holding the currency people pay you for the numbers in low risk securities between when someone pays for one and when (if ever) it eventually gets redeemed for government currency.
brunoqc 15y ago
Why not use BitCoin?
- nateberkopec 15y ago
  BitCoin's fluctuating popularity has made it's value extremely unstable, making it unsuitable for use as money. Money has to be a stable unit of account as well as a predictable store of value, characteristics BitCoin doesn't have. Basically, BitCoin for the time being is an interesting asset/investment, but not a very good cash replacement.
  - epscylonb 15y ago
    Actually since the beginning of the year bitcoin's price has been relatively stable, around the $5 mark. Whether this is the natural market price or if there is manipulation going on is hard to tell. Certainly bitcoin is more volatile than the dollar, pound or euro but those currencies fluctuate in value too. Bitcoin will be volatile whilst new coins are being minted, it is in an inflationary phase and the only upwards pressure will come from demand outstripping the supply.
  - amouat 15y ago
    The best current use case is transferring money. Assuming bitcoin is relatively stable hour to hour (which I think it is) and both sender and receiver have access to an exchange that will convert bitcoins to their local currency, it can be effectively used to avoid large bank charges. As long as the sender converts their money just prior to paying and the receiver converts back to local currency soon afterwards, there should be no problems. I guess the big assumption here is both parties have access to a reliable exchange that can easily handle the volume of currency being transferred.
    - wmf 15y ago
      So you've just replaced traditional fees with two exchange fees.
      - 15y ago
jerf 15y ago
It's interesting and I think there's tantalizing hints in there that they may have learned from BitCoin, but there doesn't seem to be enough detail in there to analyze it. Anyone know of some?
- gravitronic 15y ago
  Not really. bitcoin is p2p with cloud-acceptance of transactions. This is just a trusted hardware computing model able of holding "value".
  - jerf 15y ago
    By "learn from" BitCoin, I did not mean "blindly clone". They claim there's some ability to transfer value without an intermediary, which implies some sort of... something... which would enable that. The website doesn't make it clear to me exactly what that is, or I'd be more specific. They do seem to be fixing one of my primary objections to BitCoin by providing it some real backing... or again, so they glibly claim without details. If it is just "Hey, we'll store monetary values in the cloud" they're going out of their way to obscure that.
    - gravitronic 15y ago
      It's really nothing like bitcoin as far as I can tell. monetary value is stored on the hardware itself it seems, as you can do an offline transfer between two people. bitcoin needs the cloud as an intermediary to transfer value (cloud acceptance of transactions) as well bitcoin has traceability with unique identifiers and the text on this site suggests "no user data is transmitted with payment".
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
- duaneb 15y ago
  It feels like a step backwards from bitcoin....
- wmf 15y ago
j45 15y ago
Oh, Canada. Seeing stuff like this is exciting. Seems to be lining up along side the alley of NFC.
gravitronic 15y ago
Edit: The headline is really misleading (and subsequent comparison to bitcoin). A much better analogy is that this is paypal with hardware tokens capable of completing transfers offline. You are transferring canadian dollars. From a 2-minute introduction this looks like it's based on trusted computing in offline situations, since you don't need cloud acceptance of a transacation ala bitcoin. If that's the case, there's nothing making this unhackable. I wonder what's the timeframe before we see a illicit "client" that creates value transactions without deducting from the user's balance. There will certainly be a huge effort to create such a thing. update as I read more: It's optionally an SD card or a USB stick. clever way to interface to most every existing phone/laptop!
codesuela 15y ago
Maybe it's just me but I feel that a Royal (Canadian) crypto-currency won't find widespread adoption among cyberpunks.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- nas 15y ago
  I don't think it will but perhaps not for the reason you apparently think. The details are scarce but the crypto doesn't look interesting. The idea of trusted hardware has been around for a long time. I think most cyberpunks don't trust it, probably for good reason. BTW, looks like they use SHA-1. Really? In 2012 you design a system and use SHA-1?
jaysonelliot 15y ago
tl;dr please - is it anonymous?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- regularfry 15y ago
  "No personal data is exchanged in the transaction" implies it, but I'd be astonished if there wasn't an auditable device ID trail.
- meta 15y ago
  I don't think so, obscure but not anonymous. Here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/developing/common/mintchip-messages.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/developing/c... Each transfer message has both the Sender and Receiver encoded within it. These are opaque but generated by your mintchip provider. Looking here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht... Suggests that your provider ("trusted broker") creates your mintchip ids. It might be possible to associate many keys to your physical person but I believe all of them could be traced back with the co-operation of the providers.
- jbester 15y ago
  It's anonymous assuming the mint-chip value message and the mint-chip request message are not intercepted or stored. This is a PKI-based system, so they can verify if you signed a transaction. So if you use it online - you can't guarantee it is anonymous. If you use it in-person and nothing stores the request or response then, in theory, it should be anonymous. The giant caveat is that the documentation online does not seem to indicate whether or not a transaction log is stored in the trusted hardware.
elchief 15y ago
when did the Royal Canadian Mint become innovative? drop the penny. start bitcoin 2. go canada!
- ahelwer 15y ago
  Switching to polymer notes, too. Someone needs to investigate these happenings!
  - Foy 15y ago
    Our plastic monopoly money is the bees knees. But in all seriousness, if MintChip is for real and doesn't get hacked, and if I can finally say good bye to the penny (which I have already been getting rid of for over 2 years) then I'll have to admit that the Mint is probably more innovative than any other government entity up here. :)
  - dreur 15y ago
    Except the notes are designed by the Bank of Canada not the Royal Mint. http://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/bank-note-series/polymer/ http://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/bank-note-series/polyme...
- Khao 15y ago
  I was under the impression that the only thing they ever done is stamp new 25¢ pieces with different people / animal / commemorative events on them every year.
  - elchief 15y ago
    usually one of beaver, Queen, moose, or Avro Arrow
    - matdwyer 15y ago
      You're forgetting hockey. There is always a new hockey coin. Always.
    - 15y ago
lbotos 15y ago
So they want people to build apps using mintchips? Essentially Stripe/Paypal/Dwolla using this tech? I'm kind of confused by this. The only differentiating factor here is the currency is "mintchips". How much more creative can you get with a checkout when we are only changing the "backing" of the numbers that are moving around?
- Foy 15y ago
  I was concerned when they mentioned a criteria for judgment was originality of the idea... What can be done with online transactions that hasn't already been done? I suppose an app that allowed offline transactions would fit that bill, the only problem being that your app would be offline.
marnysmith 15y ago
Accept the challenge! http://mintchipchallenge.com/ http://mintchipchallenge.com/
cs702 15y ago
The MintChip is not even comparable to Bitcoin: it's not decentralized; it's not resistant to a Byzantine Generals-type attack; the supply of coin is not fixed; security is implemented via "tamper-proof" (ha-ha) hardware... the whole scheme looks rather hackable. IMO it's not a real alternative to Bitcoin. This strikes me as an attempt by the Royal Canadian Mint to disintermediate credit card companies by offering a new, low-cost, "irrevocable," centrally-controlled payment system.
- gravitronic 15y ago
  I agree with the flaws. I find it interesting that they stress that the phone-connected hardware is for lower-value transactions and higher-value transactions would get the larger "hardware security module". I think the real goal is that it offers offline digital user-to-user transactions.
- huhtenberg 15y ago
  True all that, but on the other hand Royal Mint - being a government agency - can't possibly be the source of a anonymous decentralized money initiative, can it? It'd be rather foolish to expect them to be. Nonetheless, this is a surprisingly innovative development to come from something as conservative as a money governance body.
  - DennisP 15y ago
    Paper cash is anonymous and decentralized...
    - rphlx 15y ago
      The creation of cash is hardly decentralized.
      - RickHull 15y ago
        Cash is decentralized in that there are no necessary 3rd parties to a transaction.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mindstab 15y ago
http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/differentiators.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/differentiat... So current hardware solutions like visa and debit are secure because they use a trusted 3rd party. And not anonymous. Bitcoin traded trusted 3rd party for trusted cloud (its p2p nature) and so was still not really anon if you put in any effort. This is supposed to be 3rd party-less, fully anon. So thats a lot of trust in the hardware. It does seem uniquely vulnerable in ways we haven't before seen with visa and debit or bitcoin.
- gravitronic 15y ago
  I believe the target for strictly-hardware transactions is to keep them low-monetary value. For example a digital replacement for the $10 you keep in your wallet to buy lunch from a hot dog vendor. Not saying the potential for a hardware exploit resulting in a money tree isn't there...
mindslight 15y ago
"Trusted" hardware for a monetary system in 2012 ? (Did the Yes Men create this site for April Fools?) With the backing of a bank, it's possible to be anonymous, offline, and prevent double spends with standard user-trustable computation - really, I kid you not. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.46.4776 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.46.4...
- Groxx 15y ago
  You wouldn't happen to have a short summary handy, would you? That's more math notation than I have time for at the moment.
  - mindslight 15y ago
    It's been a while, but IIRC: It relies on having a third party that's trusted to be a reliable provider for value and knowing customers identities to punish double spenders (a Bank). (You can give up this requirement if you want to give up one of the other qualities I mentioned above, but those are different papers ;) 1. An account holder looking to spend creates a coin through a mutual process with the bank, which debits their account. The bank is unaware of the identity of the coin, but knows that it conforms to certain properties. 2. The coin is comprised of multiple parts P_1 - P_n, each of which has two pieces, P_i_1 and P_i_2. The account identity is encoded in the coin such that it is recoverable if and only if one has both P_i_1 and P_i_2 for any i. 3. To spend, for all i, a merchant requests either P_i_1 or P_i_2. (most likely based on the merchant's identity). 4. The merchant eventually turns these coin parts over to the bank, which credits their account. If the bank sees multiple spends of the same coin, only then can it put two corresponding pieces together and deduce the account holder's identity. There are of course many details that force the parties to behave honestly at every step. The paper is somewhat old and I have no idea of further work (I'm not especially interested in protocols that require a bank or user identities). Main point being that if you do have a bank, designing protocols becomes much easier (Simple blind-signature tokens, for instance. These are anonymous but require online transactions).
    - 15y ago
oskarpearson 15y ago
In the spirit of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof", has anyone verified this? Problems: 1) No mention on the Royal Mint website that I can see. News releases seem to normally be on http://www.mint.ca/store/mint/about-the-mint/news-releases-700002 http://www.mint.ca/store/mint/about-the-mint/news-releases-7... 2) Whois should probably point to Royal Mint, not this person's house, and not to a hotmail address. Administrative Contact: Zaykova, Vessela vessyz@hotmail.com Address: 131 Camelia Ave, Ottawa, Ontario, K1K 2X5 This is a suburb. Streetview: http://bit.ly/HMFiMB http://bit.ly/HMFiMB 3) Domain is registered through GoDaddy, which IMHO is a bad sign... like having a hotmail address ;) 4) Site T&C say the site is operated by ChallengePost. ChallengePost has been listed on techcrunch: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/challengepost http://www.crunchbase.com/company/challengepost ChallengePost.com has their domain registered through GoDaddy though, so perhaps I'm wrong about that signal :) 5) No mention on the ChallengePost blog at http://blog.challengepost.com/ http://blog.challengepost.com/ 6) Vessela Zaykova does apparently work for the Royal mint though, according to http://ca.linkedin.com/in/vessela http://ca.linkedin.com/in/vessela So - very interesting news, an inadvertent early leak, or very elaborate hoax? Oskar
- msgr1 15y ago
  I am CEO of ChallengePost and this challenge is real: http://mintchipchallenge.com http://mintchipchallenge.com http://challengepost.com/discover http://challengepost.com/discover Note how excited we are that the winners receive gold bars. -Brandon
  - tpurves 15y ago
    Why is there no public announcement of this? Why does the actual Canadian Mint website have no links or mentions of this project? Why are there goats and wheat on your webpage? What is this for, some digitally enabled 19th century version of Canada? What kind of goofy hoax is this?
    - msgr1 15y ago
      Back in the day, people used goats for currency. Then it became wheat, then coins, then... you get the picture. The Mint will be issuing a press release momentarily.
jimrandomh 15y ago
This is a big step backwards from the security of Bitcoin. All someone has to do is break open the hardware and extract its key (or take its key with a side-channel attack) and they can double-spend money. That's problem one. Bitcoin's entire byzantine protocol exists entirely to solve the double-spend problem, and it works, while this doesn't. Every MintChip has an ID, and every transaction is logged on both the sending and receiving device with the ID of the other device. This means that if someone takes your chip, they get a complete record of every transaction you've ever made. In other words, it's not anonymous at all. That's problem two. Bitcoin solves this by encouraging users to generate a new address/private key for every incoming transaction, so that matching up addresses to people is hard. It's tied to single physical devices which can be lost or damaged. This makes them unsuitable for storing savings. Bitcoin wallets, on the other hand, can be backed up securely. Both MintChip and Bitcoin can be stolen if the attached device is compromised. Bitcoin is designed in a way that makes it possible to fix that, and developers are working on a fix: multi-signature transactions (so you have several computers, or a computer and a phone, and all of them must agree to any outgoing transaction). MintChip, however, cannot solve this problem in any way except with chargebacks, and the documentation given so far indicates that they aren't supporting that.
- meeeu 15y ago
  You seem to have significant insight on the topic of digital currency. I would love to learn more from you if you can spare some time. Please leave me your contact or email me only if you want to.
- Retric 15y ago
  The largest problem with Bitcoin has always been how insecure peoples computers are. WoW accounts where only worth a few dollars and yet account hacking was incredibly common unless you used a physical authenticator tied to your account. Thus, to securely use Bitcoin you really need a third party either a 'bank' or a vary secure device. PS: Banking websites have their own issues. But because they tend to use multitiple forms of authentication the are significantly harder to break into on the client side.
  - 15y ago
nato1138 15y ago
sweet. my country is a startup.
evincarofautumn 15y ago
Is that…a stock photo of code? /** * Creates a new demo. * @param o The object to demo */ public Demo(Object o) { this.o = o; String s = CONSTANT; int i = 1; } That aside, this is basically a good idea with laughably poor execution. Other comments have addressed that it’s centralised and non-anonymous, can be double-spent, is not fault-tolerant, and (perhaps worst of all) is a fiat currency without fixed supply. There could indeed be a superior alternative to Bitcoin, just waiting to make the leap into the mainstream—but this is not it.
- gravitronic 15y ago
  It's a new digital means to transfer canadian dollars. It's not a new currency. Pretty much everything after that java snippet is incorrect in your post.
  - evincarofautumn 15y ago
    I know it’s not a new currency. The post title reads “…a new alternative to BitCoin”, which MintChip is not. It’s more like Google Wallet.
jonny_eh 15y ago
The most confusing part of the site is that it's not clear how they turn goats into MintChips.
- msgr1 15y ago
  Back in the day people used goats for currency. Then wheat, coins, etc. Simple timeline.
tokenizer 15y ago
Does anyone know what they mean in the Javascript API docs when they mention that it's only supported by Microsoft Windows with Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 or higher?
Khao 15y ago
http://mintchipchallenge.com/index.php http://mintchipchallenge.com/index.php The 404 page is horrifying.
- jeffreylo 15y ago
  It's the standard ChallengePost 404 page. What's wrong with it?
  - Khao 15y ago
    Finding a website about The Royal Canadian Mint that has a crappy unicorn made with Paint as its 404 page makes it look like a huge hoax.
    - untog 15y ago
      It's a web site about the Mint, not a web site by the Mint.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- untog 15y ago
  Uh... it isn't a web site about the MintChip. It's a competition to get people using the MintChip. The title of this post is badly phrased as it might lead you to think you're getting something different.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
caycep 15y ago
the EVE online denizens are going to have a field day w/ this...
Porter_423 15y ago
after all the idea was good.I liked it pretty much
unabridged 15y ago
They didn't create an alternative, they just built the "last mile" for Bitcoin usage. A government backed anonymous currency that will most likely be accepted throughout canada and hopefully the world, that can be freely exchanged with bitcoin in a short amount of time. Anyone will be able to build an exchange. MintChip = checking account, Bitcoin = savings account
napierzaza 15y ago
People are complaining that this is just the mint cutting credit card companies out of payments. That's a good thing! My brother has no credit and can't have a credit card, and he'd probably really like to be able to make online purchases. If he could pay electronically without using something that charges interest and puts him in debt than good. Stores would love it if they could have clients pay so easily, but not have to pay the fees that the companies charge. Yes, maybe even Chinese restaurants would take it as payment.
pyre 15y ago
MintChip value can be stored and moved quickly and easily [...] by physically tapping devices together Ugh.
Canada 15y ago
License fail. Read it. It's ridiculous.
npollock 15y ago
Are there any details on how the supply of this new currency is going to be controlled? I'm all for innovation in payments and currency, but isn't there the same risk as with all fiat money - that a central body can debase the currency at will?
- sgornick 15y ago
  It isn't a new currency, I don't think. Looks like balances and transactions will be CADs, USDs, EURs, etc., If the issuer claims to have backing for the currency then for each CAD issued on a MintChip there would be a CAD in a bank somewhere. Same for USDs. Since the mint can buy BTCs to issue as well, no reason MintChips can't be used for Bitcoin commerce as well. http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/api/java/ca/mint/mintchip/contract/CurrencyCode.html#CurrencyCode(int) http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/api/java/ca/mint/mint...
SagelyGuru 15y ago
Any scheme that makes it easier to further inflate the money supply(=debt), especially one like this that avoids even the minimal inconvenience of printing cash, is sure to be welcomed and promoted by the banksters.
el_presidente 15y ago
From: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/evolution.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/evolution.ht... Unburdened by the need for a proprietary network, MintChip offers a cost effective solution to consumers and merchants and enables easy person-to-person payments. So, it looks like, this is the government's attempt to compete with Interac. The site claims it's a replacement for cash, but the last time I used cash was maybe two weeks ago to pay for a coffee. And I know some people who use a prepaid card to buy coffee.
javajosh 15y ago
I have a theory, newly formed. And this seems the best place to share it, because this motley collection of minds generally knows their stuff and won't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong. :) The only two meaningful categories of currency are "large" and "small". Large currency is cash, coins. It can be manipulated with the hand, verified by the eye. "Small currency" is expressed as microscopic state, and requires complex tools to observe, verify, etc. Both bitcoin and mintchip are microscopic currency. Computers function, then, first and foremost, as a kind of microscope. My theory is that small currency is only as secure as the microscope used. And 'microscopes' expressed on computers are themselves expressed 'in the small', requiring other microscopes to verify, which can in turn be subverted. It's subvertable microscopes all the way down. What is the solution then? You need a cheap, 'trusted' microscope/small wallet from a single source. It needs to be cheap so that it can be replaced frequently (lost or stolen). It needs to be from a single source because if trust is ever broken you need to get it from a different trusted source. Also, it would be smart to limit the amount on a single device to being less than or equal to the cost of physically defeating the device. Mind you, the MintChip "microscope" is incomplete: it requires a host system to do user interaction. Which, in my view, will always be the primary weakness of any small currency. All you need to do is write a dummy program to fool a user into believing they received the money, and you've won. And that's trivially easy.
- unimpressive 15y ago
  > I have a theory, newly formed. And this seems the best place to share it, because this motley collection of minds generally knows their stuff and won't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong. :) That would be correct. >The only two meaningful categories of currency are "large" and "small". Large currency is cash, coins. It can be manipulated with the hand, verified by the eye. "Small currency" is expressed as microscopic state, and requires complex tools to observe, verify, etc. Both bitcoin and mintchip are microscopic currency. Computers function, then, first and foremost, as a kind of microscope. What are you even saying? I saw where you were going and then you took a swerve left at the last second. How does storing state in a microscopic state turn a computer into a microscope? I assure you that no computer hardware works by looking at stored state with a lens and using computer vision algorithms to determine the state of the device. >My theory is that small currency is only as secure as the microscope used. And 'microscopes' expressed on computers are themselves expressed 'in the small', requiring other microscopes to verify, which can in turn be subverted. It's subvertable microscopes all the way down. A pet peeve of mine is calling such guesses "theories" at this point the proper term is "hypothesis". At any rate this is what cryptography is for. No amount of "subversion" is going to break checksums and hashes. (In a way that wouldn't set off serious red flags to users.) (Though turning them into a usable monetary system is left as an exercise for the reader.) >What is the solution then? You need a cheap, 'trusted' microscope/small wallet from a single source. It needs to be cheap so that it can be replaced frequently (lost or stolen). It needs to be from a single source because if trust is ever broken you need to get it from a different trusted source. It needs to not be from a single source you mean? If not then that sentence makes no sense. As it turns out; hardware bugs are actually harder to find than software ones. It would be better to use general hardware if only because you'd be less likely to find an intentional Trojan horse for bit-coin or similar in it. >Also, it would be smart to limit the amount on a single device to being less than or equal to the cost of physically defeating the device. So about the cost of a 5$ walmart screwdriver? A 50$ Blowtorch? It would end up being too low and you know it. It'd be better to just do an arbitrary limit like 500$ and call it done. >Mind you, the MintChip "microscope" is incomplete: it requires a host system to do user interaction. Which, in my view, will always be the primary weakness of any small currency. All you need to do is write a dummy program to fool a user into believing they received the money, and you've won. And that's trivially easy. Man in the middle attacks were something that certificates were supposed to solve; but didn't. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.
wcoenen 15y ago
Somebody submitted a patent application[1] about a year ago in Europe for a very similar system called fairCASH[2] [1] http://faircash.org/fileadmin/dateien/fairCASH_Patent_Application.pdf http://faircash.org/fileadmin/dateien/fairCASH_Patent_Applic... [2] http://faircash.org/ http://faircash.org/
ChristianMarks 15y ago
[Loose] change is good, this is better. Apparently, pennies weren't good enough for the Royal Canadian Mint either. Incidentally, after the crash of 2008, Joseph Stiglitz wrote that "change ... has no inherent value."
wcoenen 15y ago
One of the judges for the "challenge" is David Birch. He recently spoke at a Bitcoin conference: http://bitcoinmedia.com/eurobit-david-birch-next-generation-money/ http://bitcoinmedia.com/eurobit-david-birch-next-generation-...
charlieok 15y ago
Why must the article use this headline when the article explicitly says that it isn't actually anything like Bitcoin: “Bitcoin offers currency from a decentralized source, whereas RCM's solution is from a centralized authority.”
noduerme 15y ago
As tech founder / owner of a Bitcoin casino, https://StrikeSapphire.com https://StrikeSapphire.com, I think this is great. If it's real. And if the Royal Mint doesn't stick their nose into how we change cash. And if our users can remain more-or-less anonymous, and transactions can stay free, and we can change it out without paying a rake to the Canadian government, and there's no risk of double-spending or chargeback or backdoors in the client that let one government or another come in and raid your funds when it suits their interests. Nothing on their website gives me confidence that any of those issues have been addressed, or will be. And in truth, the idea that a national government would open up an unmonitored currency for System-D sounds just-William-Gibson-enough to be plausible, and just too Neal Stephenson to not deserve a rimshot. What's a lot more likely is that this is a big-ass trojan horse for the media to make sweet love to for the next few months while castigating Bitcoin for supposed flaws, and eventually deeming it "unsafe", followed by "illegal", for the general population. It's a PR stunt to compete with BTC in the eyes of a non-technical public. And it'll probably work - for a non-technical public. But the flaws in a system like this will likely become apparent much more quickly than, say, the flaws in the Federal Reserve system did. Nothing with a backdoor, closed code or centralized "trusted distributors" stays safe for long these days. I really had to laugh when I saw their nifty graphic over here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht... But we're not biased. Hell, we'll start accepting the junk if it's as good as they say. Let the best currency win.
joeycfan 15y ago
I'll also bet there's no privacy whatsoever with these coins.
rdl 15y ago
I don't see any point behind an offline electronic cash system; they barely made sense in the 1990s, and once there was ubiquitous Internet, made even less sense. They only make sense for transit (or other one-way systems, not peer to peer), and there, providing Internet at the point of sale is easy.
kruhft 15y ago
I wonder if it has Linux support. If not, that's my submission to the competition.
naughtysriram 15y ago
I would just use cash.
bdg 15y ago
I could never put my trust into an entire online currency if it wasn't open-source. Does anyone else worry about this as well?
adrianwaj 15y ago
Why don't they just create a new bitcoin blockchain and have every new 'goldbit' bitcoin backed by a physical gold coin? Someone should do this. So somewhere is vault filled with gold coins that people have used to buy their goldbits.
sull 15y ago
Good timing for this type of official initiative. Makes me wonder if this could lead to a Consortium of World Mints to share the same vision and cost and arrange a trusted network of Backers and Brokers. Or if this will be the new Space Race with countries competing on the tech and implementation and quality of network participants etc. Could be a mess like many standards based efforts. Then there is the issue of the patents that RCM has and how that plays into the global evolution of this effort. It may end up just being a Canadian solution for Canadian Currency. Though BitCoin is related, I don't see a a reason to inject it into this particular thread. BitCoin is its own beast with different goals... in fact... opposite goals (while using some similar technologies). BitCoin is happy as the backbone of an edge economy and not a competing system with centralised solutions like MintChip (which has decentralised aspects as well but not the core foundation).
MaltedFalcon 15y ago
The video says you can use it to buy a Canadian History Article... Does Canada have history?

358 points by jonny_eh 15y ago

Cash is anonymous. For any digital equivalent, I think this would be a key requirement to have.

msgr1 15y ago

And a software dev challenge to go with it where you can win $50K in gold bars. http://mintchipchallenge.com http://mintchipchallenge.com

jonhernandez 15y ago
Keep in mind the grand prize is $17K, it's approximately $50K spread out amongst all the winners.
- midu 15y ago
  keep in mind that the prize is GOLD! As in: https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod%3D6&ix=nh&q=1+Gold+Wafer&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&authuser=0&ei=JW98T8SGH-aU0QHlrbztCw&biw=1706&bih=876&sei=J298T8eaM4Xa0QHFooyGDA#um=1&hl=en&authuser=0&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=10oz+gold&oq=10oz+gold&aq=f&aqi=g-s2g-ms1g-sS3g-msS1&aql=1&gs_l=img.3..0i10l2j0i5i10j0i10i24l3j0i5i10i24.9130l12625l2l12702l12l12l4l0l0l0l176l628l7j1l8l0.efis.1.&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=7cb965396a7d2414&biw=1706&bih=876 https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod%3D6&ix=n...
  - eli 15y ago
    That's cute, but also pretty inconvenient.
    - Foy 15y ago
      I find it ironic that a new e-currency designed to remove the need for cash or cumbersome online payment methods would reward it's challenge winners with probably the most cumbersome currency; gold bullion.
      - ralfd 15y ago
        How would they get the 17K in Gold to you? Is it delivered via FedEx?
        lwat 15y ago
        Registered and insured mail
ben1040 15y ago
Also of note: according to the rules, it's open to Americans as well as Canadians: http://mintchipchallenge.com/rules http://mintchipchallenge.com/rules
- oskarpearson 15y ago
  It's also open to corporations in the same locations from a quick glance on my side. My guess is that us foreigners could register a company in Delaware etc, and compete.

DanI-S 15y ago

This is interesting, although the dependency on hardware seems to open a large can of worms. Judging by the security overview[1], ensuring security of the hardware will be a complex and ongoing task. Bitcoin's use of p2p here saves a lot of fucking around, and cuts out a lot of middlemen. I wish there were a middle ground - institutionally backed bitcoin. I suppose there will be, once all the mining is done and ownership becomes consolidated. [1]http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht...

loeg 15y ago
Yeah, someone is going to figure out how to give themselves 20000 billion by working around the hardware and Mintchip will die real quick.
AnthonyMouse 15y ago
>I wish there were a middle ground - institutionally backed bitcoin. You could realistically do something almost as good as that without any reliance on either bitcoin or trusted computing, if you have a central authority. It actually seems pretty simple: You create a website where people can put in a credit card numbers and exchange money for secret (1000+ bit) numbers. The server keeps track of how much money is associated with each number. If you have a secret number, you can then go back and trade it back for money, or you can (anonymously) trade it for a different secret number -- which permanently invalidates the old one and assigns its value to the new one. This way when you want to spend money, you just disclose a secret number worth the value of the transaction in question to the payee, who immediately exchanges it for a new number that the payer doesn't know, and is thereby the only one who can subsequently trade it back in for government currency. (Of course, in the common case they just re-spend it in the same way as digital cash rather than redeeming it for government currency.) Make it so that you can specify values (i.e. trade in a $5 number for a $4.50 number and a $.50 number) and you create a situation where anyone can sell anything and receive a number as payment, and then buy something else and spend the number as currency, all while neither of the other parties or the payment processor have any idea who you are. Add to this the availability of VPN accounts that assign all users to a single public IP, so that users can route their SSL-encrypted transactions through an IP shared by thousands of others who do the same and thereby prevent the transaction processing server from associating transactions with IP addresses, and you have digital anonymous cash. The main disadvantage is that the secret numbers are exactly like cash, i.e. if someone gets hold of them then they've stolen your money, it's gone, and there is nothing you can do. But that's how cash works. And I kind of wish someone would implement something like this -- I mean think about all the money you could make just by holding the currency people pay you for the numbers in low risk securities between when someone pays for one and when (if ever) it eventually gets redeemed for government currency.

brunoqc 15y ago

Why not use BitCoin?

nateberkopec 15y ago
BitCoin's fluctuating popularity has made it's value extremely unstable, making it unsuitable for use as money. Money has to be a stable unit of account as well as a predictable store of value, characteristics BitCoin doesn't have. Basically, BitCoin for the time being is an interesting asset/investment, but not a very good cash replacement.
- epscylonb 15y ago
  Actually since the beginning of the year bitcoin's price has been relatively stable, around the $5 mark. Whether this is the natural market price or if there is manipulation going on is hard to tell. Certainly bitcoin is more volatile than the dollar, pound or euro but those currencies fluctuate in value too. Bitcoin will be volatile whilst new coins are being minted, it is in an inflationary phase and the only upwards pressure will come from demand outstripping the supply.
- amouat 15y ago
  The best current use case is transferring money. Assuming bitcoin is relatively stable hour to hour (which I think it is) and both sender and receiver have access to an exchange that will convert bitcoins to their local currency, it can be effectively used to avoid large bank charges. As long as the sender converts their money just prior to paying and the receiver converts back to local currency soon afterwards, there should be no problems. I guess the big assumption here is both parties have access to a reliable exchange that can easily handle the volume of currency being transferred.
  - wmf 15y ago
    So you've just replaced traditional fees with two exchange fees.
    - 15y ago

jerf 15y ago

It's interesting and I think there's tantalizing hints in there that they may have learned from BitCoin, but there doesn't seem to be enough detail in there to analyze it. Anyone know of some?

gravitronic 15y ago
Not really. bitcoin is p2p with cloud-acceptance of transactions. This is just a trusted hardware computing model able of holding "value".
- jerf 15y ago
  By "learn from" BitCoin, I did not mean "blindly clone". They claim there's some ability to transfer value without an intermediary, which implies some sort of... something... which would enable that. The website doesn't make it clear to me exactly what that is, or I'd be more specific. They do seem to be fixing one of my primary objections to BitCoin by providing it some real backing... or again, so they glibly claim without details. If it is just "Hey, we'll store monetary values in the cloud" they're going out of their way to obscure that.
  - gravitronic 15y ago
    It's really nothing like bitcoin as far as I can tell. monetary value is stored on the hardware itself it seems, as you can do an offline transfer between two people. bitcoin needs the cloud as an intermediary to transfer value (cloud acceptance of transactions) as well bitcoin has traceability with unique identifiers and the text on this site suggests "no user data is transmitted with payment".
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
duaneb 15y ago
It feels like a step backwards from bitcoin....
wmf 15y ago

j45 15y ago

Oh, Canada. Seeing stuff like this is exciting. Seems to be lining up along side the alley of NFC.

gravitronic 15y ago

Edit: The headline is really misleading (and subsequent comparison to bitcoin). A much better analogy is that this is paypal with hardware tokens capable of completing transfers offline. You are transferring canadian dollars. From a 2-minute introduction this looks like it's based on trusted computing in offline situations, since you don't need cloud acceptance of a transacation ala bitcoin. If that's the case, there's nothing making this unhackable. I wonder what's the timeframe before we see a illicit "client" that creates value transactions without deducting from the user's balance. There will certainly be a huge effort to create such a thing. update as I read more: It's optionally an SD card or a USB stick. clever way to interface to most every existing phone/laptop!

codesuela 15y ago

Maybe it's just me but I feel that a Royal (Canadian) crypto-currency won't find widespread adoption among cyberpunks.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
nas 15y ago
I don't think it will but perhaps not for the reason you apparently think. The details are scarce but the crypto doesn't look interesting. The idea of trusted hardware has been around for a long time. I think most cyberpunks don't trust it, probably for good reason. BTW, looks like they use SHA-1. Really? In 2012 you design a system and use SHA-1?

jaysonelliot 15y ago

tl;dr please - is it anonymous?

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
regularfry 15y ago
"No personal data is exchanged in the transaction" implies it, but I'd be astonished if there wasn't an auditable device ID trail.
meta 15y ago
I don't think so, obscure but not anonymous. Here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/developing/common/mintchip-messages.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/developing/c... Each transfer message has both the Sender and Receiver encoded within it. These are opaque but generated by your mintchip provider. Looking here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht... Suggests that your provider ("trusted broker") creates your mintchip ids. It might be possible to associate many keys to your physical person but I believe all of them could be traced back with the co-operation of the providers.
jbester 15y ago
It's anonymous assuming the mint-chip value message and the mint-chip request message are not intercepted or stored. This is a PKI-based system, so they can verify if you signed a transaction. So if you use it online - you can't guarantee it is anonymous. If you use it in-person and nothing stores the request or response then, in theory, it should be anonymous. The giant caveat is that the documentation online does not seem to indicate whether or not a transaction log is stored in the trusted hardware.

elchief 15y ago

when did the Royal Canadian Mint become innovative? drop the penny. start bitcoin 2. go canada!

ahelwer 15y ago
Switching to polymer notes, too. Someone needs to investigate these happenings!
- Foy 15y ago
  Our plastic monopoly money is the bees knees. But in all seriousness, if MintChip is for real and doesn't get hacked, and if I can finally say good bye to the penny (which I have already been getting rid of for over 2 years) then I'll have to admit that the Mint is probably more innovative than any other government entity up here. :)
- dreur 15y ago
  Except the notes are designed by the Bank of Canada not the Royal Mint. http://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/bank-note-series/polymer/ http://www.bankofcanada.ca/banknotes/bank-note-series/polyme...
Khao 15y ago
I was under the impression that the only thing they ever done is stamp new 25¢ pieces with different people / animal / commemorative events on them every year.
- elchief 15y ago
  usually one of beaver, Queen, moose, or Avro Arrow
  - matdwyer 15y ago
    You're forgetting hockey. There is always a new hockey coin. Always.
  - 15y ago

lbotos 15y ago

So they want people to build apps using mintchips? Essentially Stripe/Paypal/Dwolla using this tech? I'm kind of confused by this. The only differentiating factor here is the currency is "mintchips". How much more creative can you get with a checkout when we are only changing the "backing" of the numbers that are moving around?

Foy 15y ago
I was concerned when they mentioned a criteria for judgment was originality of the idea... What can be done with online transactions that hasn't already been done? I suppose an app that allowed offline transactions would fit that bill, the only problem being that your app would be offline.

marnysmith 15y ago

Accept the challenge! http://mintchipchallenge.com/ http://mintchipchallenge.com/

cs702 15y ago

The MintChip is not even comparable to Bitcoin: it's not decentralized; it's not resistant to a Byzantine Generals-type attack; the supply of coin is not fixed; security is implemented via "tamper-proof" (ha-ha) hardware... the whole scheme looks rather hackable. IMO it's not a real alternative to Bitcoin. This strikes me as an attempt by the Royal Canadian Mint to disintermediate credit card companies by offering a new, low-cost, "irrevocable," centrally-controlled payment system.

gravitronic 15y ago
I agree with the flaws. I find it interesting that they stress that the phone-connected hardware is for lower-value transactions and higher-value transactions would get the larger "hardware security module". I think the real goal is that it offers offline digital user-to-user transactions.
huhtenberg 15y ago
True all that, but on the other hand Royal Mint - being a government agency - can't possibly be the source of a anonymous decentralized money initiative, can it? It'd be rather foolish to expect them to be. Nonetheless, this is a surprisingly innovative development to come from something as conservative as a money governance body.
- DennisP 15y ago
  Paper cash is anonymous and decentralized...
  - rphlx 15y ago
    The creation of cash is hardly decentralized.
    - RickHull 15y ago
      Cash is decentralized in that there are no necessary 3rd parties to a transaction.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

mindstab 15y ago

http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/differentiators.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/differentiat... So current hardware solutions like visa and debit are secure because they use a trusted 3rd party. And not anonymous. Bitcoin traded trusted 3rd party for trusted cloud (its p2p nature) and so was still not really anon if you put in any effort. This is supposed to be 3rd party-less, fully anon. So thats a lot of trust in the hardware. It does seem uniquely vulnerable in ways we haven't before seen with visa and debit or bitcoin.

gravitronic 15y ago
I believe the target for strictly-hardware transactions is to keep them low-monetary value. For example a digital replacement for the $10 you keep in your wallet to buy lunch from a hot dog vendor. Not saying the potential for a hardware exploit resulting in a money tree isn't there...

mindslight 15y ago

"Trusted" hardware for a monetary system in 2012 ? (Did the Yes Men create this site for April Fools?) With the backing of a bank, it's possible to be anonymous, offline, and prevent double spends with standard user-trustable computation - really, I kid you not. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.46.4776 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.46.4...

Groxx 15y ago
You wouldn't happen to have a short summary handy, would you? That's more math notation than I have time for at the moment.
- mindslight 15y ago
  It's been a while, but IIRC: It relies on having a third party that's trusted to be a reliable provider for value and knowing customers identities to punish double spenders (a Bank). (You can give up this requirement if you want to give up one of the other qualities I mentioned above, but those are different papers ;) 1. An account holder looking to spend creates a coin through a mutual process with the bank, which debits their account. The bank is unaware of the identity of the coin, but knows that it conforms to certain properties. 2. The coin is comprised of multiple parts P_1 - P_n, each of which has two pieces, P_i_1 and P_i_2. The account identity is encoded in the coin such that it is recoverable if and only if one has both P_i_1 and P_i_2 for any i. 3. To spend, for all i, a merchant requests either P_i_1 or P_i_2. (most likely based on the merchant's identity). 4. The merchant eventually turns these coin parts over to the bank, which credits their account. If the bank sees multiple spends of the same coin, only then can it put two corresponding pieces together and deduce the account holder's identity. There are of course many details that force the parties to behave honestly at every step. The paper is somewhat old and I have no idea of further work (I'm not especially interested in protocols that require a bank or user identities). Main point being that if you do have a bank, designing protocols becomes much easier (Simple blind-signature tokens, for instance. These are anonymous but require online transactions).
  - 15y ago

oskarpearson 15y ago

In the spirit of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof", has anyone verified this? Problems: 1) No mention on the Royal Mint website that I can see. News releases seem to normally be on http://www.mint.ca/store/mint/about-the-mint/news-releases-700002 http://www.mint.ca/store/mint/about-the-mint/news-releases-7... 2) Whois should probably point to Royal Mint, not this person's house, and not to a hotmail address. Administrative Contact: Zaykova, Vessela vessyz@hotmail.com Address: 131 Camelia Ave, Ottawa, Ontario, K1K 2X5 This is a suburb. Streetview: http://bit.ly/HMFiMB http://bit.ly/HMFiMB 3) Domain is registered through GoDaddy, which IMHO is a bad sign... like having a hotmail address ;) 4) Site T&C say the site is operated by ChallengePost. ChallengePost has been listed on techcrunch: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/challengepost http://www.crunchbase.com/company/challengepost ChallengePost.com has their domain registered through GoDaddy though, so perhaps I'm wrong about that signal :) 5) No mention on the ChallengePost blog at http://blog.challengepost.com/ http://blog.challengepost.com/ 6) Vessela Zaykova does apparently work for the Royal mint though, according to http://ca.linkedin.com/in/vessela http://ca.linkedin.com/in/vessela So - very interesting news, an inadvertent early leak, or very elaborate hoax? Oskar

msgr1 15y ago
I am CEO of ChallengePost and this challenge is real: http://mintchipchallenge.com http://mintchipchallenge.com http://challengepost.com/discover http://challengepost.com/discover Note how excited we are that the winners receive gold bars. -Brandon
- tpurves 15y ago
  Why is there no public announcement of this? Why does the actual Canadian Mint website have no links or mentions of this project? Why are there goats and wheat on your webpage? What is this for, some digitally enabled 19th century version of Canada? What kind of goofy hoax is this?
  - msgr1 15y ago
    Back in the day, people used goats for currency. Then it became wheat, then coins, then... you get the picture. The Mint will be issuing a press release momentarily.

jimrandomh 15y ago

This is a big step backwards from the security of Bitcoin. All someone has to do is break open the hardware and extract its key (or take its key with a side-channel attack) and they can double-spend money. That's problem one. Bitcoin's entire byzantine protocol exists entirely to solve the double-spend problem, and it works, while this doesn't. Every MintChip has an ID, and every transaction is logged on both the sending and receiving device with the ID of the other device. This means that if someone takes your chip, they get a complete record of every transaction you've ever made. In other words, it's not anonymous at all. That's problem two. Bitcoin solves this by encouraging users to generate a new address/private key for every incoming transaction, so that matching up addresses to people is hard. It's tied to single physical devices which can be lost or damaged. This makes them unsuitable for storing savings. Bitcoin wallets, on the other hand, can be backed up securely. Both MintChip and Bitcoin can be stolen if the attached device is compromised. Bitcoin is designed in a way that makes it possible to fix that, and developers are working on a fix: multi-signature transactions (so you have several computers, or a computer and a phone, and all of them must agree to any outgoing transaction). MintChip, however, cannot solve this problem in any way except with chargebacks, and the documentation given so far indicates that they aren't supporting that.

meeeu 15y ago
You seem to have significant insight on the topic of digital currency. I would love to learn more from you if you can spare some time. Please leave me your contact or email me only if you want to.
Retric 15y ago
The largest problem with Bitcoin has always been how insecure peoples computers are. WoW accounts where only worth a few dollars and yet account hacking was incredibly common unless you used a physical authenticator tied to your account. Thus, to securely use Bitcoin you really need a third party either a 'bank' or a vary secure device. PS: Banking websites have their own issues. But because they tend to use multitiple forms of authentication the are significantly harder to break into on the client side.
- 15y ago

nato1138 15y ago

sweet. my country is a startup.

evincarofautumn 15y ago

Is that…a stock photo of code? /** * Creates a new demo. * @param o The object to demo */ public Demo(Object o) { this.o = o; String s = CONSTANT; int i = 1; } That aside, this is basically a good idea with laughably poor execution. Other comments have addressed that it’s centralised and non-anonymous, can be double-spent, is not fault-tolerant, and (perhaps worst of all) is a fiat currency without fixed supply. There could indeed be a superior alternative to Bitcoin, just waiting to make the leap into the mainstream—but this is not it.

gravitronic 15y ago
It's a new digital means to transfer canadian dollars. It's not a new currency. Pretty much everything after that java snippet is incorrect in your post.
- evincarofautumn 15y ago
  I know it’s not a new currency. The post title reads “…a new alternative to BitCoin”, which MintChip is not. It’s more like Google Wallet.

jonny_eh 15y ago

The most confusing part of the site is that it's not clear how they turn goats into MintChips.

msgr1 15y ago
Back in the day people used goats for currency. Then wheat, coins, etc. Simple timeline.

tokenizer 15y ago

Does anyone know what they mean in the Javascript API docs when they mention that it's only supported by Microsoft Windows with Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 or higher?

Khao 15y ago

http://mintchipchallenge.com/index.php http://mintchipchallenge.com/index.php The 404 page is horrifying.

jeffreylo 15y ago
It's the standard ChallengePost 404 page. What's wrong with it?
- Khao 15y ago
  Finding a website about The Royal Canadian Mint that has a crappy unicorn made with Paint as its 404 page makes it look like a huge hoax.
  - untog 15y ago
    It's a web site about the Mint, not a web site by the Mint.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

untog 15y ago
Uh... it isn't a web site about the MintChip. It's a competition to get people using the MintChip. The title of this post is badly phrased as it might lead you to think you're getting something different.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

caycep 15y ago

the EVE online denizens are going to have a field day w/ this...

Porter_423 15y ago

after all the idea was good.I liked it pretty much

unabridged 15y ago

They didn't create an alternative, they just built the "last mile" for Bitcoin usage. A government backed anonymous currency that will most likely be accepted throughout canada and hopefully the world, that can be freely exchanged with bitcoin in a short amount of time. Anyone will be able to build an exchange. MintChip = checking account, Bitcoin = savings account

napierzaza 15y ago

People are complaining that this is just the mint cutting credit card companies out of payments. That's a good thing! My brother has no credit and can't have a credit card, and he'd probably really like to be able to make online purchases. If he could pay electronically without using something that charges interest and puts him in debt than good. Stores would love it if they could have clients pay so easily, but not have to pay the fees that the companies charge. Yes, maybe even Chinese restaurants would take it as payment.

pyre 15y ago

MintChip value can be stored and moved quickly and easily [...] by physically tapping devices together Ugh.

Canada 15y ago

License fail. Read it. It's ridiculous.

npollock 15y ago

Are there any details on how the supply of this new currency is going to be controlled? I'm all for innovation in payments and currency, but isn't there the same risk as with all fiat money - that a central body can debase the currency at will?

sgornick 15y ago
It isn't a new currency, I don't think. Looks like balances and transactions will be CADs, USDs, EURs, etc., If the issuer claims to have backing for the currency then for each CAD issued on a MintChip there would be a CAD in a bank somewhere. Same for USDs. Since the mint can buy BTCs to issue as well, no reason MintChips can't be used for Bitcoin commerce as well. http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/api/java/ca/mint/mintchip/contract/CurrencyCode.html#CurrencyCode(int) http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/api/java/ca/mint/mint...

SagelyGuru 15y ago

Any scheme that makes it easier to further inflate the money supply(=debt), especially one like this that avoids even the minimal inconvenience of printing cash, is sure to be welcomed and promoted by the banksters.

el_presidente 15y ago

From: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/evolution.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/evolution.ht... Unburdened by the need for a proprietary network, MintChip offers a cost effective solution to consumers and merchants and enables easy person-to-person payments. So, it looks like, this is the government's attempt to compete with Interac. The site claims it's a replacement for cash, but the last time I used cash was maybe two weeks ago to pay for a coffee. And I know some people who use a prepaid card to buy coffee.

javajosh 15y ago

I have a theory, newly formed. And this seems the best place to share it, because this motley collection of minds generally knows their stuff and won't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong. :) The only two meaningful categories of currency are "large" and "small". Large currency is cash, coins. It can be manipulated with the hand, verified by the eye. "Small currency" is expressed as microscopic state, and requires complex tools to observe, verify, etc. Both bitcoin and mintchip are microscopic currency. Computers function, then, first and foremost, as a kind of microscope. My theory is that small currency is only as secure as the microscope used. And 'microscopes' expressed on computers are themselves expressed 'in the small', requiring other microscopes to verify, which can in turn be subverted. It's subvertable microscopes all the way down. What is the solution then? You need a cheap, 'trusted' microscope/small wallet from a single source. It needs to be cheap so that it can be replaced frequently (lost or stolen). It needs to be from a single source because if trust is ever broken you need to get it from a different trusted source. Also, it would be smart to limit the amount on a single device to being less than or equal to the cost of physically defeating the device. Mind you, the MintChip "microscope" is incomplete: it requires a host system to do user interaction. Which, in my view, will always be the primary weakness of any small currency. All you need to do is write a dummy program to fool a user into believing they received the money, and you've won. And that's trivially easy.

unimpressive 15y ago
> I have a theory, newly formed. And this seems the best place to share it, because this motley collection of minds generally knows their stuff and won't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong. :) That would be correct. >The only two meaningful categories of currency are "large" and "small". Large currency is cash, coins. It can be manipulated with the hand, verified by the eye. "Small currency" is expressed as microscopic state, and requires complex tools to observe, verify, etc. Both bitcoin and mintchip are microscopic currency. Computers function, then, first and foremost, as a kind of microscope. What are you even saying? I saw where you were going and then you took a swerve left at the last second. How does storing state in a microscopic state turn a computer into a microscope? I assure you that no computer hardware works by looking at stored state with a lens and using computer vision algorithms to determine the state of the device. >My theory is that small currency is only as secure as the microscope used. And 'microscopes' expressed on computers are themselves expressed 'in the small', requiring other microscopes to verify, which can in turn be subverted. It's subvertable microscopes all the way down. A pet peeve of mine is calling such guesses "theories" at this point the proper term is "hypothesis". At any rate this is what cryptography is for. No amount of "subversion" is going to break checksums and hashes. (In a way that wouldn't set off serious red flags to users.) (Though turning them into a usable monetary system is left as an exercise for the reader.) >What is the solution then? You need a cheap, 'trusted' microscope/small wallet from a single source. It needs to be cheap so that it can be replaced frequently (lost or stolen). It needs to be from a single source because if trust is ever broken you need to get it from a different trusted source. It needs to not be from a single source you mean? If not then that sentence makes no sense. As it turns out; hardware bugs are actually harder to find than software ones. It would be better to use general hardware if only because you'd be less likely to find an intentional Trojan horse for bit-coin or similar in it. >Also, it would be smart to limit the amount on a single device to being less than or equal to the cost of physically defeating the device. So about the cost of a 5$ walmart screwdriver? A 50$ Blowtorch? It would end up being too low and you know it. It'd be better to just do an arbitrary limit like 500$ and call it done. >Mind you, the MintChip "microscope" is incomplete: it requires a host system to do user interaction. Which, in my view, will always be the primary weakness of any small currency. All you need to do is write a dummy program to fool a user into believing they received the money, and you've won. And that's trivially easy. Man in the middle attacks were something that certificates were supposed to solve; but didn't. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

wcoenen 15y ago

Somebody submitted a patent application[1] about a year ago in Europe for a very similar system called fairCASH[2] [1] http://faircash.org/fileadmin/dateien/fairCASH_Patent_Application.pdf http://faircash.org/fileadmin/dateien/fairCASH_Patent_Applic... [2] http://faircash.org/ http://faircash.org/

ChristianMarks 15y ago

[Loose] change is good, this is better. Apparently, pennies weren't good enough for the Royal Canadian Mint either. Incidentally, after the crash of 2008, Joseph Stiglitz wrote that "change ... has no inherent value."

wcoenen 15y ago

One of the judges for the "challenge" is David Birch. He recently spoke at a Bitcoin conference: http://bitcoinmedia.com/eurobit-david-birch-next-generation-money/ http://bitcoinmedia.com/eurobit-david-birch-next-generation-...

charlieok 15y ago

Why must the article use this headline when the article explicitly says that it isn't actually anything like Bitcoin: “Bitcoin offers currency from a decentralized source, whereas RCM's solution is from a centralized authority.”

noduerme 15y ago

As tech founder / owner of a Bitcoin casino, https://StrikeSapphire.com https://StrikeSapphire.com, I think this is great. If it's real. And if the Royal Mint doesn't stick their nose into how we change cash. And if our users can remain more-or-less anonymous, and transactions can stay free, and we can change it out without paying a rake to the Canadian government, and there's no risk of double-spending or chargeback or backdoors in the client that let one government or another come in and raid your funds when it suits their interests. Nothing on their website gives me confidence that any of those issues have been addressed, or will be. And in truth, the idea that a national government would open up an unmonitored currency for System-D sounds just-William-Gibson-enough to be plausible, and just too Neal Stephenson to not deserve a rimshot. What's a lot more likely is that this is a big-ass trojan horse for the media to make sweet love to for the next few months while castigating Bitcoin for supposed flaws, and eventually deeming it "unsafe", followed by "illegal", for the general population. It's a PR stunt to compete with BTC in the eyes of a non-technical public. And it'll probably work - for a non-technical public. But the flaws in a system like this will likely become apparent much more quickly than, say, the flaws in the Federal Reserve system did. Nothing with a backdoor, closed code or centralized "trusted distributors" stays safe for long these days. I really had to laugh when I saw their nifty graphic over here: http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.html http://developer.mintchipchallenge.com/devguide/ecosystem.ht... But we're not biased. Hell, we'll start accepting the junk if it's as good as they say. Let the best currency win.

joeycfan 15y ago

I'll also bet there's no privacy whatsoever with these coins.

rdl 15y ago

I don't see any point behind an offline electronic cash system; they barely made sense in the 1990s, and once there was ubiquitous Internet, made even less sense. They only make sense for transit (or other one-way systems, not peer to peer), and there, providing Internet at the point of sale is easy.

kruhft 15y ago

I wonder if it has Linux support. If not, that's my submission to the competition.

naughtysriram 15y ago

I would just use cash.

bdg 15y ago

I could never put my trust into an entire online currency if it wasn't open-source. Does anyone else worry about this as well?

adrianwaj 15y ago

Why don't they just create a new bitcoin blockchain and have every new 'goldbit' bitcoin backed by a physical gold coin? Someone should do this. So somewhere is vault filled with gold coins that people have used to buy their goldbits.

sull 15y ago

Good timing for this type of official initiative. Makes me wonder if this could lead to a Consortium of World Mints to share the same vision and cost and arrange a trusted network of Backers and Brokers. Or if this will be the new Space Race with countries competing on the tech and implementation and quality of network participants etc. Could be a mess like many standards based efforts. Then there is the issue of the patents that RCM has and how that plays into the global evolution of this effort. It may end up just being a Canadian solution for Canadian Currency. Though BitCoin is related, I don't see a a reason to inject it into this particular thread. BitCoin is its own beast with different goals... in fact... opposite goals (while using some similar technologies). BitCoin is happy as the backbone of an edge economy and not a competing system with centralised solutions like MintChip (which has decentralised aspects as well but not the core foundation).

MaltedFalcon 15y ago

The video says you can use it to buy a Canadian History Article... Does Canada have history?