|
Lets just focus on getting ActM on either Bitfunder or Havelock (since looking Havelock does seem to be a much better choice)
It would be nice to have a 1 time option to decide where we want our shares, HL or BF.
If HL becomes an option I would like all my BF shares one time moved over too please.
After that we need to focus on making miners and selling miners. This should be priority and any new exchange system should really take a backseat right now. We need income and profits big time.
|
|
|
|
It seems highly unlikely to me that he's been told to close down by the SEC or any LE. Were that to have happened then closure would have been more of a case of pulling the plug out than the gradual winding down that has been announced. This feels far more like being told to stop by his own lawyers than a cease-and-desist or seizure by some government agency - they don't give you a month to sort things out in, they want immediate cessation of activity.
This sounds spot on. If it was the SEC they wouldn't allow an illegal exchange to continue operating for another month. Deprived I have a question if you would be kind enough to answer. What process would have Burnside had to go through to make the exchange legal? Because exchanges are able to run in the USA. So I am sure there must be a path to create a legal compliant exchange. Do you have any idea? |
|
|
|
Paging MPOE-PR to tell us all "I told you so"
I can't wait! Time to combine two of my favorite memes with my gimpy GIMP skills. Thanks for the laugh in this dark hour.  |
|
|
|
Paging MPOE-PR to tell us all "I told you so"
I can't wait! |
|
|
|
Oh crumbs!
Lol, is this you? 6,666 ฿0.00150001 Nope. :p So i heard Ken's starting his own exchange You all in? Imagine the graphics... Well I do prefer getting on BF or HL in the immediate future. However if Active started hashing and could pay some top-notch designers and do the whole thing professionally it could be a good idea for the far future. |
|
|
|
Oh crumbs!
Lol, is this you? 6,666 ฿0.00150001 Nope. :p |
|
|
|
What about these coloured coin ideas? Can they be used as shares for decentralized exchanges?
They could be, they could serve as tokens for shares. i.e. 0.00001btc could represent one share. The problem is you wouldn't have a two way transaction - if you pay first, you have to trust that the person will return the coin. If you send the shares first you have to trust the other person will pay. It might be possible to configure it correctly with the scripts, but then you'd need to be able to write scripts that know about coin 'color'. Which I'm not sure is yet supported. In fact, I'm not even sure what scripting features are currently supported. My idea would only need normal scripts with data included, that the asset issuer would look for on the blockchain. Has anyone considered maybe using one of the secure alternative coins (the only one I can think of is Litecoin, every other one is venerable) Instead of bloating our blockchain, use Litecoin as a coloured coin system. |
|
|
|
Sure, that is a possibility also.
I think BF for the immediate future is the best idea. At least it would join both the markets finally. IMHO Havelock is a much better choice. If so, can we move all BF shares too? I want them joined as I have shares on both exchanges. Also 1 big liquid market is far better than 2 smaller ones. |
|
|
|
|
What about these coloured coin ideas? Can they be used as shares for decentralized exchanges?
|
|
|
|
|
Ken, do you have an ETA until we can move to BF?
|
|
|
|
@Ken, but you are US citizen no? Will that be an issue?
As long as the security itself and the public shareholders are not American it should be fine. I know lots of people that own companies with different legal structures offshore. They can offer shares under those legal structures just fine as long as they are within the correct legal framework (so not offering shares back to americans for example) |
|
|
|
If I started my own stock exchange and sold volcaniceruptor shares, they would be direct shares because I am not a third party..
I assume the exchange would list other securities. Maybe I misunderstood. |
|
|
|
Sure, that is a possibility also.
I think BF for the immediate future is the best idea. At least it would join both the markets finally. |
|
|
|
Valueing everything at bid price is a bad way to do things at the moment.
It's exactly the right thing to do at the moment, because that -- and only that -- provides an indication of the fund's liquid net value. When some assets are likely to be wiped out entirely (BTC-TRADING-PT, for example), nobody cares what the 7-day moving average or 30-day moving average might be. I took the time to release a special interim report immediately so that participants could have quantitative facts in front of them, right now, telling them exactly where we stand. Will things change over the next few hours and days? Of course they will, and hopefully for the better -- but that doesn't make it "a bad way to do things" to have given the specific, quantitative information as quickly as humanly possible. ...You went to great lengths saying the money was spread among various platforms, lets see if that strategy works as well you said it would.
There's no need to wait and see: of course it "worked" to the extent that the vast majority of the fund's capital is immune to BTC-TC's closure. Dude. You are awesome. |
|
|
|
AMC already has a Stock Exchange built and is in the testing phase.
If BF failed and we used that exchange, would it be owned by the shareholder and would we receive the trade fee as a dividend? |
|
|
|
With the announcement of the closure of BTC-T over potential legal fears I began to wonder why it would not be possible to create a decentralized exchange, possibly even placing it on the .bit or .onion DNS. Anyway, is this a possibility and what would be the difficulties and limitations associated with this?
First problem is trust. Is there any exchange idea where the only person you have to trust is the security owner/manager of the security you are buying? If an exchange can be trustless for the system itself and the only failure point is the securities (which will never be trustless by nature) I think that would be a good idea. But alas, I can't think of a way that could happen. |
|
|
|
|
Well if anyone wants a positive, putting all the shares on Bitfunder will add more liquidity to the market.
Thats all I can think of right now.
|
|
|
|
Also - has anyone noticed that despite the 1 percent edge JD has never made a 1 % profit? It was about half that - before the current fiasco - now we know why.
This part is untrue. Before Nakowa we hit almost 2% profit. I have been with the site since the beginning and it was certainly over 1% for the first few weeks until Nakowa came. |
|
|
|
This would be a good time to think of what to do when BF also closes down, because its only a matter of time IMO.
A bitcoin exchange will exist at some point, if BF goes down we can trade shares off exchange. Its possible to register a dividend and ownership addresses similar to what ASICMINER does. But one thing at a time, lets get on BF first. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
