Everyone should read up on what falls into being a unregistered security. Since Blocknet, and other features/applications dealing with decentralized networks(blockchains), cannot be owned or centralized, there is no way to classify them as unregistered securities since everyone is as equal as the other and therefore you technically can't depend on the efforts of a development team. Basically, being that Blocknet, Ethereum, etc, are based around/are cryptocurrencies and not centralized, then they cannot be thought of as an investment as you would to a centralized Company selling shares. However, sites that sell parts/ownerships/shares of companies, such as what happened with Erik and his SatoshiDice IPO, are the ones being affected here, and there have been a large amount of sites, exchanges doing IPO's of their own(I saw decent amounts of threads by some exchanges selling "shares" that would grant the buyer stake in the exchange itself and a % of money earned from fees, etc) |
|
|
|
|
Women and men are not that different. Both sexes compliment one another. Research MRI brain scanning to see the differences between women and men in the brain, and you can obviously see the difference physically. Society just likes to complicate matters for absolutely no reason based on things such as cultural beliefs etc.
Men are generally more headstrong or dominant than Women(Testosterone), physically/mentally.
Women are generally more empathetic or intricate than Men(They generally can empathize with others more readily)
I often use the analogy that Men are the drivers, while Women are directors. You can't have a director(One who shows the driver the way to go) without a driver(One who takes everyone to their destination) and vice versa.
The above though, is just a really rigid line defining men and women at extremes. Most men and women I would say fall in between(So there are tons of men that feel very empathetic, and tons of women that are headstrong), etc.
I would say the ultimate defining characteristic is the dominant/submissive natures of each sex. Women are generally more submissive(taking out cultural ideals about how women should act and going purely by personal experience), as I've questioned some women on the topic and they prefer to be submissive to their counterparts most of the time(but definitely not all the time) especially in sexual scenarios, and Men are generally more dominant(taking the lead and going after/chasing their interests; women).
|
|
|
|
This is his brother. I'm not at home right now, but when I get there I'll link the thread to how my brother, Bruno, was probably murdered. I'm limited to what I'll be able to say, but suffice to say that the Illinois police department has narrow down who did it and he WAS an active forum member that had something to do with some magazine in South Korea I think. His name was Matt or Natt and he supposedly scammed a bunch of bitcoins over some bit with a pirate.
Later.
Oh my gosh, are you serious? Magazine? South Korea? Bruno? Mars?!?! - Gleb Gamow is Phinneaus Gage  - |
|
|
|
may I say I like the fact that "moneroj" as plural for monero is catching on?  I still hold my coins, I think Monero will eventually win the anon race: http://www.deepdotweb.com/tag/ArmsRace/edit: my average buy in is around 0.003 And yes, I bought some XMR (called MRO back then) at 0.000212 I'm too risk averse to put a serious amount of BTC on the table when a currency is a few weeks old  TBH, That "article" on deepdotweb is as biased as it can get. Look at here for ex: "but Anoncoin’s developers have found a work around and soon they are going to release their version of ZeroCoin, that doesn’t require a third party to set up." -Oct 28th If you go to Anoncoin's thread, Gnosis has failed multiple times and postponed everytime, zerocoin's implementation. Recently he made a date for zerocoin to be implemented on the 15th of sept, never happened and he postponed the implementation for 3 months ahead. Yes 3 months, which clearly shows he was just pumping and dumping anoncoin with his timelines. That article just plainly mentions and puts emphasis on the coins that the author holds and wishes to p/d. Out of all the anonymous systems found in cryptocurrency, Cryptonote is still by far the best. |
|
|
|
Someone please give me 3 reasons to turn some of my XC into Blocknet tomorrow. Or, if you prefer, give me 3 reasons not to. Thanks.
Anyone? One blocknet share cost around .002 btc. One XC coin cost around .007 BTC at this moment, that means you get a little more 3 blocknet shares per 1 XC. Do the math |
|
|
|
does blocknets devs'll dump xc exchanged by blocknets shares asap?!
if yes, i think we'll be at 50k-60k next week
No they dont dump....Its already been said 1000000x times. |
|
|
|
Top 25 according to what? Market cap, price, or trading volume? market cap. Why is WC listed then? Its market cap is $112,584 and #100 while XC is $1,421,991 and #24 according to coin market cap. Oh I wasn't talking about bitcoinwisdom. Was responding to the "top 25" comment. Nvm, disregard my post all together. lol. |
|
|
|
Top 25 according to what? Market cap, price, or trading volume? market cap. |
|
|
|
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) today issued two administrative rulings regarding digital currency. And the government has apparently decided to go with the nuclear option. The first ruling published today relates to the application of FinCEN regulations to a virtual currency trading platform, while the second ruling discusses the application of FinCEN regulations to a virtual currency payment system. In ruling FIN-2014-R011, FinCEN states that any and all cryptocurrency exchanges must become licensed as a money transmitter including crypto-only exchanges:"As explained in the Guidance, a person is an exchanger and a money transmitter if the person accepts convertible virtual currency from one person and transmits it to another person as part of the acceptance and transfer of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency." In ruling FIN-2014-R012, the agency confirms that any and all payment processors are obliged to register as money transmitters, significantly increasing the cost of entry in becoming a digital payments provider. "As described above, the Company is an exchanger under the Guidance because it engages as a business in accepting and converting the customer’s real currency into virtual currency for transmission to the merchant. The fact that the Company uses its cache of Bitcoin to pay the merchant is not relevant to whether it fits within the definition of money transmitter." Once labeled a money transmitter, a business wishing to continue operating must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to become licensed in each of the 50 states. And that’s only the beginning of the regulatory costs and legal hoop jumping. In addition, companies are required to register with FinCEN, conduct a comprehensive risk assessment of its exposure to money laundering, implement an Anti-Money Laundering Program based on such risk assessment, and comply with various record keeping, reporting and transaction monitoring obligations, in addition to meeting several other requirements. It is interesting to note that the government classifies Bitcoin as a digital “property” for taxation purposes, but as a digital “money” for regulatory and licensing purposes. Full Story: http://altcoinpress.com/2014/10/fincen-ruling-us-government-ramps-up-war-on-cryptocurrency/Bolded red: there is already solution www.multigateway.orgStill Beta version. Um... multi gateway is an exchange service that charges fees, and gateway currencies are held on the platform?? The platform owners or developers could be subject? What defines ownership of a platform? What defines a crypto exchange business? Multi gateway is definitely a crypto exchange platform. But the law is vague. In decentralized nature, then only nodes in the USA using the platform are at risk? Of course they are pushing for full disclosure starting at the root.. Counterparty is getting the beats.. nxt ae next? I've read the new legislation, but frankly it is very vague.. which means leaves open to new legislation and vague rulings. Can extradition be possible if in order with anti terror laws? After all, laundering is just the first cause to order, and vague definitions will link to global order terror laws soon enough... Make no mistake about it. . This thread and this law.. is only a small part of what to come. The question on anonymity being real was a poke at the order the global unseen government has on us all.. Remember . Sha256. . Well who created it? Interesting laws are now being passed to protect the us governments perhaps.. crown jewel? Bitcoin? Also remember. Any of us movers and shakers, and in particular every single anon coin dev that isn't already an nsa honeypot.. is on a list. . And don't think you're personal information can't be linked to mobile gps, registration documents, that your isp, mobile provider, debit cards, visa cards, (prepaid or otherwise) can't be tracked and will not be logged.. The anon marketing scam, well is scrutiny.. and ultimately forced disclosure.. Satoshi designed bitcoin as 100% anon. Just use a different address. Every transaction. Does anyone really think that nsa software can't break through the shitty poorly designed 'anon' currency transactions.. When they the ones that wrote the initial script? People are too lazy to start a new addy every transaction, and sure as hell wouldn't be marketable.. Internet aliases will likely be passed as legal representatives of all the 'anon" coins. I just hope anon practices supercede anon software. . Cuz it'll be like Domino's. .and a blank blockchain = jail time. Why? Financial disclosure... Anon coins.. we'll they unfortunately don't have records. Extradition? Well depends on how isis pads the anti terror law legislation being passed and the joining of coalition in areas of vague law in the new global order.. Many powerful incidents as of late.. but don't think you can hide behind a vpn. . Anon... was created before you were all born. No matter how many layers in an onion.. can still be stripped to the core.. and thrown on the good old American bbq. Especially when that onion was grown in the good old us of a.. What is the fight? Bitcoin may be the enemy of freedom.. The hard fork impending.. sidechains impending.. sunshine and lollipops for alts? Sarcastic understood. How can one truly fight? Human rights are being stripped under our noses.. and every crypto that claims to be a business, or corporation or says hi! I'm the ceo of fuck the government is asking for a lashing not only personally but all the investors.. Anyone mind to stop calling crypto currencies a business? Or should I go back to my job at 711 and give up.. I'd like to point out, that you give way way too much credit to the NSA. Yes they have a vast amount of resources and very trained/skilled people, but Private companies have A Lot more very skilled people. The geniuses of this world dont work for the government, when they can make much more money working privately. Bitcoin has what we call, psuedo anonymity, and it is not or even remotely close to "100% anon". Yes you're correct in that using new addresses for every transaction would hide your tracks(not that effectively though), but seriously, what average person is going to do that? Remember, you're not marketing crypto to the techies, you're marketing it to the average population. Therefore, anon coins fit the bill perfectly, such as Monero. Cryptonote allows for both regular sending(as with bitcoin), and anonymous sending with different mixing levels. |
|
|
|
|
Lol.
Washing Machine=Worst gift for the modern feminist wife.
|
|
|
|
Never used or heard of them. |
|
|
|
Anyone care to speculate on how this impacts poloniex or bittrex (both based in USA but I'm assuming not registered as money transmitters)?
Better to close Cryptsy and CryptoStocks, too? Cryptsy already paid the massive fee. Think they're good. And seems the issue is.. exchange fees? As long as no fees are charged, then these rules don't apply? Oh I'd forgotten that Cryptsy became a licensed money transmitter(Hence there USD Markets). I guess Cryptsy is the (only?) american exchange to use now. |
|
|
|
It would have annual % increase, so even after the entire supply is mined out, you still get a certain % of coins every year proportional the # of coins you hold?
Just tell me what the wonder is the idea behind giving more coins in proportion of the existing coins? What does it accomplish? You got me. I hadn't thought it out, was just pelting ideas in the open. But I have to say, Bitshares DPoS(Delegated Proof of Stake) is interesting. It would be interesting to see if it would benefit by incorporating it into Monero. |
|
|
|
That's one train wreck of a first name. You gotta dumb it down a bit because i don't understand the relationship between altcoins and ghash/cex. I thought GHASH was a mining pool and if my memory serves me correctly CEX sells mining shares?
I believe Ghash(mining pool) is owned by Cex.io(exchange), which is also a company(Cex.io). https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CEX.IO |
|
|
|
|
I believe now, especially coupled with FinCen's latest ruling, that Blocknet's nature puts it ahead of other public offering styled events. It being fully decentralized (not having any set of core coins, which I admit I argued against before the FinCen ruling ), and lack of trust on one single team(It's composed of a large set of different decentralized coins), makes it an even better contender than Supenet was.
|
|
|
|
Huge buy order at 70k on Bter, if some of you need liquidity in BTC.
Dang, 32 btc buy at 70k... Well, the recent FinCen ruling is definitely gonna create a huge boost in demand for anon coins(like XC). |
|
|
|
Wouldn't a longer/lower emissions curve benefit everyone?
It wouldn't clearly benefit miners, unless the price went up enough to offset the reduced rewards. If some of the miners depart, the coin becomes less secure. It wouldn't necessarily benefit the reputation or adoption of the coin, since it looks like an instamine. If you have been involved for the past six months, you got the benefit of large numbers of coins being minted and traded at low (and even increasingly lower) prices. Then mining gets cut and everyone but the early adopters gets to fight over a smaller supply, or pay up to buy from early adopters' stashes. It also wouldn't necessarily benefit confidence in (and again reputation of) the coin. If it is considered acceptable to change once, it could be acceptable to change again. No one knows where that leads, and it is hard for anyone who is buying to know what he or she is buying. Also a slower curve now means higher inflation later, for a longer period of time. Pay now or pay later? This is not a the sort of change to be made lightly. I most certainly preferred a slower curve at the start. Now, I'm not sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. My thought is that price per coin would offset the loss in mining rewards, so the hash rate wouldn't be affected unless everyone migrated to larger pools to offset the lesser chance of reward. See the point of acceptable change--how do you sell such a major strategical move? Slower curve of inflation? Hmmm.... Maybe 2% with a hidden x% is something the bankers got right? 2% + x fee = how many years? In Devs we trust.  Interesting. What if Monero eventually became partly PoS, similar to Peercoin or partly DPoS like Bitshares? It would have annual % increase, so even after the entire supply is mined out, you still get a certain % of coins every year proportional the # of coins you hold? |
|
|
|
So Ethereum, SuperNET, BlockNET, etc all should be untouched If by untouched you mean "The SEC is reportedly employing researchers that track down the people and/or companies behind domains and Bitcointalk accounts associated with certain IPOs" then yes, very untouched. "The letters are being sent out to companies performing offerings on Counterparty, Cryptostocks, companies hosting offerings with colored coins, and companies who have performed unregistered securities offerings via Bitcoin Talk. In all cases the SEC is employing a team of researchers to track down the people or companies behind each offering via forum messages, domain registration information, transfers of funds via exchanges and other means." - https://coinfire.cf/2014/10/27/sec-begins-sending-investigation-letters/That doesn't go for cryptocurrencies that don't offer shareholder status which exempts Ethereum's IPo/Supernets/Blocknets from the ruling.....AKA only companies/crowdfunding sites are affected. Unregistered securities- http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/unregistered-securities.aspEthereum IPO thoughts- http://www.quora.com/What-do-securities-lawyers-think-of-the-Ethereum-Genesis-saleSupernet/Blocket depends on the efforts of a variety of blockchains and its people(especially Blocknet since it doesnt have one core coin, but would put Supernet more in the grey area and Ethereum might be as well, but I don't believe so), not one single team. IMO, it falls in favor of cryptocurrency trading(like Bitcoin), instead of speculative investments, which wouldnt make it an unregistered security. |
|
|
|
U.S customers? No, the ruling is dealing with the merchants themselves, not the customers(people using the exchange/bitcoin company) I just don't really see how they can do anything about US people voluntarily interfacing with an overseas company Well, the ruling would require all those operating within the U.S(or catering to U.S people), to get registered as a money transmitter.I'm not entirely sure what effect this would have on overseas companies/exchanges. good ole btc-e I guess. they're going to be the last ones standing in this mess. Coincidentally, I actually think this ruling would serve as the basis for enormous spikes/surges in the popularity of anon coins, along with decentralized exchanges(and those centralized ones not operating within the U.S). |
|
|
|
U.S customers? No, the ruling is dealing with the merchants themselves, not the customers(people using the exchange/bitcoin company) I just don't really see how they can do anything about US people voluntarily interfacing with an overseas company Well, the ruling would require all those operating within the U.S(or catering to U.S people), to get registered as a money transmitter.I'm not entirely sure what effect this would have on overseas companies/exchanges, unless theyd be required to block ip's of those from the U.S if they aren't registered as a money transmitter within all 50 states. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
