is there an exploitable bug the forum.glbse ?
some dude just posted a bazilion spam posts that should not be possible
(it if the 2min limit would be still applied)

glbse volume stats at the moment show only the total trading volume of the asset since the 2.0 inception (or ipo if later than 2.0 went live)
we're still waiting for finer reports (list of trades, daily/weekly volume)

did you consider starting with an existing software like bitcoin-central?
has the trading part done with LR support I think and configurable currencies.

edit: bitcoin-central is open source, search for user davout on github or here.

I placed, went to a meeting and saw that it was not filled. I'll go and buy a BFLS instead : (
but it was a nice daydream to mine with a contract (while it lasted).
maybe some pre-orders will sell for profit as already mentioned

just btw, for the record

well, the site uses a field labelled email, which is a unique identifier of a person and falls under personal data protection (at least in EU)
a brief disclaimer would be nice to have to comply with that stuff.
something along the lines:
- what data is collected (email, logs?),
- how the data collected will be used (opt in email notifications, important messages from site administrator on updates of ...)
- no other use (no sharing of data with third parties nor marketing etc)
- who is the data processor and how the data can be viewed and rectified
// it's all in the personal data protection regulation, i already started to collect some notes on the subject
// it is relevant even if run outside of EU as it concerns its citizens ... could be dealt with in a link from a footer to a static page with appropriate text

it is not about the ID verification of asset issuers
this applies just because of the email is entered and is used while login
// i spent few months studying this (weird hobby some time ago)

+ there's the cookie directive, if a site wants to store a cookie on user's pc it needs user's informed approval for this
// can be fined up to 1/2M eur; i'm more familiar with the data protection then the cookie stuff as i stopped following it 2yrs ago and the cookie stuff is newer

but (how) should it be included in TOS? i mean it's their personal responsibility to check what they're doing and to comply with their commitments and work induced constraints
(and i noticed them they know what they can / can not do and act accordingly)

and who's the father?


// post #400

I think small facelift to the gui would do for now (add spacing, check proportions of elements on the screen, move them around maybe)
then refine some reporting (show trade history, not just total volumes)
and add a few options to existing features to make the use less rocky

all sorts of fiduciary licensed personnel like auditors, accountants, actuaries, licensed financial counselors ...
and maybe traders as well. they have somewhere probably a clause about code of conduct and must comply in private with the stuff that they do professionally. if they get caught playing with bitcoins, depending what kind of game, they might be in trouble

this is how I understood the 'financial certification'
i think there are too many and not applicable to all of them but there might be overlaps (with consequences for folks involved)
but they would know best or at least better

afaik btcsyn issuer discussed the option to have dump of shareholders as a plan B if this site would go tits up and it was promised to assist with whatever data would be available to connect with shareholders
it was back then in 1.0 glbse without email, most probable scenario was to request public keys and numbers of shares held to be able to verify identity using the crypto part of old exchange and know the shares held in that account at the given moment

i have no fresh rumors from 2.0 glbse era.

You can't report your own post to the moderator, that doesn't make sense!
(at least I can't report mine ... / tried to have mine moved with your new thread ...)

I was thinking loud how to prevent OP ass from any kind of enforcement / intervention
best thing I could think of is plausible deny ability. not being anonymous to law enforcement
just making it hard to proof that it's A or B who is running the website.

edit
as for the legal framework, how is this different from a club or organization?
at last in UK bitcoin is not money, thus stuff denominated in bitcoin is not an investment vehicle?

you're not the only one. I wrote in an email I'd provide postal address, phone nr and show id on skype but no way I'd send a scanned hires pic of my ID. on the other hand my glbse asset management worth is zero and what I planned to issue had anyway a cap of < 100 btc to begin with

i did not suggest starting a new exchange in .onion network, just move the existing one there to avoid issues with legal framework.


how would you tell a mining company from a grow room from a distance?
they both burn electricity, if done smart, they are profitable
and the later can create bitcoin via the mentioned silk road.
just fake stats or don't publish them at all
and dividends can have material representation instead of a binary payout if needed
problem is they usually do not look for partners nor want a large web of trust
don't want to suggest that glbse could be to investors what silk road is to its users

would it be feasible to just go out of beta into gamma and only be available as a hidden service
that way good luck finding the server and there goes the problem with registering any legal entity what so ever.
if considering running it as a hidden service and tor might be an issue, proxies could do the hard job for lazy people.

I mean look how it started, open source play money exchange for kind of shares in more open source thingies and we're not hurting anybody nor building another enron. this is a way of keeping score and like in a good novel, any similarities with real person is coincidence. the operators might get unpleasant mail one day and TOS are needed to keep their asses safe keeping our assets safe.

that will be tough then. I hope we, the people won't ddos glbse with last second requests to put a bid at high enough price to be top 500 and still not pay too much

e: btw thanks for the specifications about time/zone. i've set up an alarm for that

why 9am? server midnight will be in 6 and 1/2 hrs
are you going to sleep nao? ; )
and yes, good luck is needed

which of the principles of bitcoin is preventing transfers of bitcoins between addresses?

what about the example you create a company that has a part of the funds coming from other sources and you just need to transfers shares to them?
or simply do not want to hold all your assets in the same account?

let the transfers be visible if you wish, but do not prevent them
and also which principle of bitcoin is it to have 1 central node you must trust that binds them all?

I'd love to see bearer bonds or bearer shares, kind of crypto strings or armored ascii files recognizable by the exchange that would be fully tradeable outside the exchange just like bitcoin. something like a throw away email with strong password used only for an account here, funded with shares or bitcoins and encapsulated for anyone to use. redeemable code for shares would be easier to use but i see no demand for this atm.

@compukin and how do you think the  2step authenticator from google apps will work?
which ID will be used to compute the floating code in the application?
where the fuck should glbse know the values for the 2nd step?
U NO follow the instructions?

here is what I did and how it worked
00 create a gmail accout
01 in google account settings go to settings and enable 2 step authentication
10 download the google authenticator in my smart phone
11 register a new user at glbse with that google email
100 enabled 2 step authentication and got the QR code displayed instantly (along the txt code) - simply scanned with the phone
101 profit

on another account I did skip the step 01 and it turned wrong there ...

edit sorry for being cocky to you

did you enable (set up) 2step auth first on the gmail account?

most important comment first:

do not change the rules in the middle of things. this way the changes seem retroactive because they impact agreements already made.