This is all CIA#s fault, I am telling you. In 50 years time they will declassify how Satoshi is a codename of one of their departments.  |
|
|
|
|
IANAL, but if one knowingly sells bonds to unaccredited investors via proxy, one probably violates those pesky securities laws anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Also giving annualised minimum interest rates for every tier would be great. You surely do not want to mislead investors, so it must be a good idea.
What kind of risks are there, i.e. what would potentially cause you to default and return nothing or less than invested capital?
|
|
|
|
Vladimir seems to have a lot of free time lately LOL, yep, waiting for ASIC's to be printed do that to people. |
|
|
|
If someone's not willing to read the entirety of the OP, they probably shouldn't be investing hundreds of BTC in this, anyway.
Also if someone is just trolling and not willing to invest a single bitpenny, he should not try to read the entirety of the OP. Too bad OP had failed to do executive summary. |
|
|
|
|
Your numbers are accurate. Anyway, I'd pass on all of this, never really considered as something I'd want to do. Too convoluted scheme for me to take it seriously. If one has 5-10k BTC to invest, one could as well go direct to JRO and get a better deal.
|
|
|
|
|
OK I am just trying to wrap my brain about such exotic instruments. Of course it cannot be used for valuation.
I understand it is effectively a redeemable at any moment at option of issuer not preferable not convertible bond for a startup company. The bond pays percent of company profit.
In other words the deal here is: "you give me money, I will pay you some interest eventually, maybe, after a startup company becomes profitable, and right until I decide that the interest is too high and then I will return you your capital plus 15%" (plus December 12th, 2012 limitation). Well, if so this is not such an insane deal as I thought initially. Could you please confirm that I got it right now.
|
|
|
|
Is Bitcoin really such a collection of gullible suckers? You've read it wrong, Vlad. .0011428571% of Kronos' net profit, not of face value. As is stated, the 175k bonds, in total, pay 20% of Kronos' monthly net profit. OK got it now. It is good to be wrong. Now, would you care to justify your valuation of Kronos at 17500 BTC * 5 * 5 = 437500 USD i.e. half a million USD ? |
|
|
|
|
paying .00011428571% bi-weekly,
Does this mean that investor will double their money (with reinvestment i.e. with compounding) in about 72/.00011428571 * 14 = 8820000 days or 24500 years?
Please tell me some number here is badly wrong, by four orders of magnitude or so.
What is wrong with all the GLBSE assets on one side there 10% per week ponzi's by proxy, on the other side there are investments that allow one to double his money in only 25 millennia.
Is Bitcoin really such a collection of gullible suckers?
|
|
|
|
I will post information here as I receive it.
28 May 07:00: Discussion right now is centered on the nature of payouts. There is the question of what nature the payout system should take with different people favouring 1 of 2 approaches (one is fast and unreliable, the other slow and reliable). I can't say more than that for technical reasons. Everyone wants to pay everyone back, but have a differing opinion how it will work.
Slow method i.e. mailing cheques or certified cheques could just work, just let users to chose among 3 major currencies (USD, GBP, EUR) you likely have all the bank accounts for that, convert at cost. Just a suggestion. |
|
|
|
Well, umm, ya. Most market theories assume due to the definition of a 'transaction', there is a buyer for every seller, and a seller for every buyer. FWIW. I'm not up-to-speed on the Libertarian economic theories so they may differ. Not sure.
It is more about who is more impatient and active, buyer or seller i.e. who jumps the spread and hit ask or bid respectively. |
|
|
|
Why retailers would make a big deal out of a server wholesaler's new buzzword for shit service is totally beyond me. Guess it sounds fancy to their customers.
Indeed, this is beyond comprehension. Apparently these cloud things have hypnotizing effect on Zhou's generation of Internet Pros "powered by google search". People stop eating all the marketing BS you are being fed. |
|
|
|
How long will the 1st issue be available? (I'm referring, of course, to the physical edition.)
If I decide sometime in the near but indeterminate future that I'd like to buy a subscription, could I get the back issue magazine(s)?
Issue #1 will be available for backorders for some time, right until we run out. We also plan to make it possible to order subs that start from #1 #2 #3 etc. BTW for those who are worried that there are too many copies printed and their #1's are not that collectible as they have expected, I can leak the following: "some copies of issue #1 will be more collectible than others". As many know having some story and quirks goes a long way to making things collectible. We are still working on "story" while some quirks are in place already including mentioned "page three, bottom right corner". |
|
|
|
There should be a prediction market where you can bet which site will get hacked next  Just like assassination markets except for websites.... That would be cool, but only if owners of websites could take the other side of the bets. This would kind of allow some to finance information security efforts. LOL. |
|
|
|
|
re digital edition: All those who ordered Bitcoin Magazine up until now will get both print and digital editions. Digital edition of issue #1 most likely will be distributed to all subscribers, DRM free, sometime in June.
Our strategy on distribution of digital version is not yet finalised, there are a few options possible. We will try to get it into every major online newsstand out there ASAP, however.
There will be an announcement once we have some more clarity on this.
Meanwhile please do post some feedback on how do you think digital edition should be distributed. Your opinion really can change things now.
|
|
|
|
Right, here is a VC backed company with Bitcoin developers and "with specialisation in information security" CTO on board who own and operate a service that got hacked. And you think that it is all fault of a 17 yo who they have hired and who was an employee and later got effectively fired.
Good luck convincing any judge or anyone with a modicum of common sense.
Your post is so hindsight is 20/20. It is bad practice to make sudden disruptive changes overnight to a production system. Instead the theory was a very gradual replacing of the system while observing changes. Bitcoinica was already very fragile. I still think that was a good decision. Absolutely! It is in hindsight, no arguments here. But note that I am not attacking you at all. I am just pointing out how unreasonable it is to attack Zhou. Frankly, the only thing I could fault Zhou for, big time, is not taking my information security related advise early on and accepting my resignation over that. At least since then I had multiply opportunities to enjoy "I told you so" moments. Sincerely Yours, Captain Gloat. LOL |
|
|
|
|
Right, here is a VC backed company with Bitcoin developers and "with specialisation in information security" CTO on board who own and operate a service that got hacked. And you think that it is all fault of a 17 yo who they have hired and who was an employee and later got effectively fired.
Good luck convincing any judge or anyone with a modicum of common sense.
|
|
|
|
|
I personally learned from ribuck to do just that too and advise all others to consider as a standard practice to never sign any NDA's ever personally.
|
|
|
|
Seriously? Are you guys talking with your financier on this forum and asking him here to confirm details of your NDA terms? This is getting much closer to that russian comedy youtube videos standard now than ever before! Who is this guy "Bitcoinica Consultancy"? I was wrong, Bitcoin's entertainment value is not 50$ it is 100$ now. Here we go guys, all those who were asking all the time what is Bitcoin backed by, you now have your answer. Bitcoin is backed by non-stop entertainment. Per standard practice, Bitcoin Consultancy entered into a non-disclosure agreement which extends to Bitcoinica's proprietary systems and processes. They are free to discuss their role and history with the company.
Hi, Thank you for this. We are incredibly happy. We will need to clear up some distinctions and make sure the account is in fact Tihan's account. He can do so via confirmation in email or on skype. We also need clarification as to what "role and history mean". 1. Are Bitcoinica Consultancy and its individual members allowed to talk about the security issues and this incident without limitation? Yes/No The NDA extends to our persons I believe. Finally, Tihan, people seem to have questions regarding the database. 2. Are we, Bitcoinica Consultancy and it's individual members, at liberty to discuss in full detail the nature of the database? Yes/No 3A. Are we, Bitcoinica Consultancy and it's individual members, at liberty to release relevant skype logs in full without worry that information in those logs are sensitive? Yes/No 3B. If there is a "No" answer for question 3A, could you specify and clearly what we are not allowed to post (for example, content that would violate a user's privacy) and remember to claim that the list of restrictions you post is an exhaustive list. 4. Are you willing to take the short steps to nullify any NDA we may have? Yes/No 5. Can we release a full account of the security detail and practices relevant to Bitcoinica's history and this incident? Yes/No Finally, we can certainly see the semblance of unprofessionality that Bitcoinica Consultancy was resonating. we would like to apologise for having to go to such an extreme. We were urged against making such statements by Tihan and Zhou as they would hurt everyone's reputation, including our own. The circumstances were such that we had no real ability to respond to misinformation and misrepresentation. We full well knew that our immediate reputation would suffer greatly. In matters like this, things often need to get worse before they can get better. However, it seems we will be finally be successful in providing full disclosure for everyone. We were talking with Tihan about trying to clear up misrepresentations for a long time and with Zhou as well. Unfortunately, we were not granted the ability to clear up the relevant issues (possibly until now) and Zhou kept making and continues to make false statements and wildly misrepresenting the facts. We are very happy with the turn of events as we are certain that (as long as Tihan's comment wasn't intentionally nondescript or ambiguous) we will be able to set the record straight. We are not pursuing this matter at the expense of the reclaims process. However, when we have time, we will (in great detail) show that many statements that have been made have been malicious and false. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
