This is what happens when a country is ready to shutdown/extradite anyone breaking some arbitrary money transmission law.
Name someone who has been shut down or extradited in this case because this is paranoia. |
|
|
|
Please answer! This press release is not clear.
Why is it they set the date for right before crowdfunding law comes into affect? Are they not wanting regulation? Probably easier to run the site without regulation. Another US site with regulation should be able to take its place |
|
|
|
"Title III of the JOBS Act: Public Securities Crowd Investing. This next part of the JOBS Act is probably what the law is best known for: legalizing securities crowd investing. More specifically, a company can raise up to $1 million within a 12 month period from the general public through a broker-dealer or ‘funding portal’ website. Investors are subject to annual investment caps based on their income or wealth, and there are investor education requirements, as well as limits on general advertising. This portion of the law also requires SEC rulemaking before it can ‘go live.’ The SEC is now nine months late on issuing new rules, although the prevailing expectation based on Commission statements is that proposed rules will be out this fall. Nevertheless, until final rules are issued, securities crowd investing is not permitted. Instead, only close cousin 506(c) investing is available to a limited percentage of the population. For the sake of clarity, let’s differentiate between non-financial-return or donation-based ‘crowdfunding,’ Title II 506(c) investing, and Title III: crowd investing. Title IV of the JOBS Act: Regulation A+. This next title of the JOBS Act potentially increases the attractiveness of another securities registration exemption. Regulation A has permitted the sale of securities to both accredited and unaccredited investors so long as the issuer files a mini-registration with the SEC and complies with relevant state law requirements in each state where funds are solicited. One online issuer, Fundrise, has used this exemption to raise money from investors in Washington, D.C. and Virginia for a local commercial real estate project. Title IV of the JOBS Act increases the offering limit from $5 million to $50 million in a 12-month period, requires that certain filings be provided to investors, and provides for annual audited financial statements. This portion of the law requires SEC rulemaking before going live, which has to date not yet occurred. For the sake of clarity, lawyers and wonks tend to call this portion of the law: Reg A+ investing." http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/10/08/the-jobs-act-isnt-all-crowdfunding/ |
|
|
|
Well at this point it will happen everywhere and then some JD etc no excluded, until we get up p2p stuff for everything US gov is going to be doing this.
Right but Hong Kong might be one of the few places that flips the USG the bird when they tell 796 to cut off their American investors. But even if the SEC would say that and it makes no sense why they would, the new law takes effect in a matter of months. Crowdfunding is not going to be illegal in 2014 so by the time the SEC does do something it will be legal anyway. If the exchange is not in the USA then it probably wont be worth it for the SEC to bother with it. If the exchange is in the US that is an exchange which will probably have to shut down until 2014 to US customers. Bitfunder and others could encourage US investors to wait it out, I'm not sure why they want to initiate panic selling. |
|
|
|
Well at this point it will happen everywhere and then some JD etc no excluded, until we get up p2p stuff for everything US gov is going to be doing this.
The US government isn't doing this. It's paranoid of people running the exchanges doing this. The SEC has legalized crowdfunding and the new law is set to take effect this year. SecondMarket already has a Bitcoin Trust for accredited investors. Unaccredited investors will be able to invest sometime in late 2013 when the SEC phases that into effect. Bitfunder and BTCT are basically creating an opportunity for another exchange to start up and launch in late 2013 offering equity crowd funding for unaccredited investors. BTCT and Bitfunder could have waited a few months but I think the arrests from the FBI and their legal advisers have them spooked. |
|
|
|
While a number of people think the Government seizing the SilkRoad coins is a bad thing, it might actually work to our benefit. Having the US government as a major shareholder of BTC could provide a good stability mechanism for Bitcoin. According to one article on the SR adventure, the FBI still has not gotten to DPR's encrypted Bitcoin wallet which supposedly holds nearly $80 million worth of Bitcoin. With this amount of Bitcoin in public coffers at this stage in the game it means that the US government could end up being one of the largest holder of bitcoin in the entire ecosystem and might spur other governments (namely China) to aggressively seek to create/mine/seize their own reserves of Bitcoin. Such information would most likely be a boon to the value of Bitcoin and could see the integration of Bitcoin into large public financial structures down the line.
That was the case from the start. Use Litecoin instead. |
|
|
|
I can't really go into detail at this point but we looked in-depth at all of our options.
If the environment changes we may have the option to come back later.
After you've auctioned off the code? If he does come back 6 months to a year from now, a lot will have changed. I expect that the exchanges will have decentralized backends with central website/domain names on the front end. Remember how Napster was at one point the poster boy of file sharing? It was centralized P2P and could be stopped. Then as they cracked down on it, we ended up with Gnutella, then Limewire, Bearshare and finally Bittorrent. At some point, we will be able to trade stocks, bonds, and all sorts of stuff through the blockchain itself or with some other decentralized backend protocol. The website front end would still matter though, because trading is a lot more than just a transaction. The stock market is going to be decentralized and distributed and it's only a matter of time before it happens either on the Bitcoin blockchain itself or with an altcoin. The DATA which formed recently also gives the Bitcoin community growing lobbying power and the community should seek to make one of it's very first priorities to get better crowd funding legislation to create an exemption for Bitcoin funded businesses. Dollar funded businesses should remain under the regular SEC crowdfunding laws, but Bitcoin funded businesses should be treated differently because people using Bitcoin have a different level of risk tolerance, technical capability, and the goal should be to legitimize things rather than drive it underground. Figure out by collecting data how people actually trade in the Bitcoin community and then make regulations based around community norms. The SEC does not understand and probably thinks Bitcoin is like some kind of online poker chip when in reality its much more important. |
|
|
|
Maybe there are other SEC regulations violated by security exchanges like btct.co?
Yes but those regulations were minor and could have been fixed over time. Like for instance in each particular state there are certain laws to prevent scams but these laws are mainly about preventing fraud and not targeting the crowd funding exchanges as far as I know. The Jobs Act specifically allows for sites like BTCT provided that they set it up right. Burnside could have known that the SEC law hasn't fully taken effect but the fact that it is on the books, signed, and in the process of taking effect he could have just waited for it to take effect and then complied with it. Either the DATA will push its lobbyists into modifying laws on the state level or a decentralized exchange will do it. It would be best to do it with the SEC so that scams can be avoided or prosecuted, but I expect that the decentralized exchange will still exist for high risk investors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmFjmvwPGKU |
|
|
|
"The SEC has lifted the ban on General Solicitation which means that companies can publicly advertise their fundraising efforts to accredited (high net worth) investors. It is expected that later this year the SEC will publish rules allowing non-accredited investors to participate as well."
I doubt many (if any) of those involved in this exchange are accredited investors. If they are, they have much better things to do with their money. You did not read all the websites. Sterlingfunder already allows unaccredited investors if they are from Georgia. This means any company can offer their securities on Sterlingfunder right now and US unaccredited investors can purchase. Also many people involved in Bitcoin in 2013 are unaccredited investors but in 2016 they may be accredited investors. Why would you suggest they'd have better things to do with their money? The SEC law will take affect sometime in late 2013 which means it's only months away from allowing unaccredited investors to invest. This is why I don't understand the decision of Burnside or others. If it's literally going to happen within a matter of months why not just wait it out? If he could run the site as long as he did what is a few more months of waiting? |
|
|
|
3. That having US investors (with the rules in the US being VERY different) is OK. This one is interesting - but the answer is almost certainly that a UK-based exchange could NOT accept US-based investors as - even if fine to operate in the UK, it would break agreements between the UK and the US. So there's a very real likelihood that any new exchange would not take US investors - the situation with US companies is less clear.[/b]
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alanmcglade/2013/09/18/crowdfunding-will-flourish-regardless-of-what-the-sec-does/Rely on the Jobs Act legislation which makes crowdfunding legal for US investors. There are already sites set up now which are doing equity crowdfunding.
"The SEC has lifted the ban on General Solicitation which means that companies can publicly advertise their fundraising efforts to accredited (high net worth) investors. It is expected that later this year the SEC will publish rules allowing non-accredited investors to participate as well."
"Some forward looking state governments have decided not to wait for federal rulemaking and opened up alternative financing options for businesses and investors that reside within their state. Kansas, the first state to enact laws requiring the registration of sales of securities to the general public 100 years ago, turned out to be the first in the U.S. to enact an “intrastate” equity crowdfunding law. It was put in place by the Securities Commissioner of Kansas and essentially exempted sales of securities from state registration to an unlimited number of non-accredited investors."
"The state of Georgia passed the Invest Georgia Exemption that provides even more freedom for crowdfunding than the Kansas exemption. North Carolina’s House passed a crowdfunding bill that is expected to move to the full legislature in an updated form and be signed into law next year. The state of Washington is currently teeing up crowdfunding legislation and other states will likely follow suit."
This is the invest Georgia exemption: http://rules.sos.state.ga.us/docs/590/4/2/08.pdfhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MOxY6GgMdaQThe invest Georgia exemption basically would require that the business be licensed and run from Georgia. If it is then US investors from Georgia can invest through the exemption on Sterlindfunder. Burnside did not have to shut down BTCT, he could have incorporated in Georgia just as SterlingFunder has done and then waited for the SEC laws to crowdfunding laws take effect in each state. Ultimately there will be sites which take advantage of US crowd funding legislation and Sterlingfunder already does this, but the other possibility is for the US to drive innovation into decentralized route which is also a possibility. If it's part of the block chain then colored coins, mastercoin, Bitshares, or something similar could allow for securities without the need for Tor. Time is on your side. |
|
|
|
"............Canadian law enforcement authorities ... have no record of there being any Canadian resident with the name DPR passed to redandwhite as the target of the solicited murder-for-hire. Nor do they have any record of a homicide occurring in White Rock, British Columbia on or about March 31, 2013." So DPR did pay 1670XBT but no homicide happened. Most probably, he was scammed  "FriendlyChemist" (the blackmailer) and "redandwhite" (the supplier) are most probably the same person. After all, there was no evidence showing they were different persons, and DPR was naive enough to trust redandwhite and sent him 150000USD in bitcoin. Looks like extortion. Also it's possible that both FriendlyChemist and redandwhite were confidential informents working on behalf of the FBI to take him down. You know, one guy making threats and trying to blackmail you to get the money out of you and another guy, a hitman who conveniently appears and offers to help take care of your problem? If the FBI does it then it's an investigation and if the mafia does it then it's a protection racket. This doesn't excuse what he did, but it should put things in a context. |
|
|
|
Dear Investors and Security Issuers, As some of you may be aware a collective of security issuers and interested parties have banded together to attempt to purchase Burnside's code so that we can continue to operate the exchange, although perhaps under a different name and likely with some restrictions. If you are a security issuer please join the conversation on the recovery board (in the litecoin forum). I am urging all security issuers not to make rushed decisions to move to a new exchange right now! Unfortunately some of you have gone to CryptoStocks.com already, which from what I can see is technically inferior and has near-zero liquidity (there are also some oddities like why VirCurEx has not paid dividends there for ages). At CipherMine we are developing a simple tool to allow an issuer to import the .csv from a shareholder report and use that to distribute a dividend payment manually (ie. you just enter the amount and it sends that much to the shareholders). We intend to give this away to all of you for free. BTC Trading Co does not shut down entirely for a month yet. You will be able to use the mechanisms there to distribute dividends in the mean time, and then you will still be able to with our tool or something similar. It is the hope of our collective that we can have something operational within the next couple of months, so hopefully there would only be a short period of time where your securities were illiquid (barring manual trades of course). To Shareholders, I cannot speak for all but most of us issuers intend to do the Right Thing and are making efforts, including committing significant personal resources, to try to look after you all. In the mean time, please everyone hang in there and don't make panicked decisions! We will keep you posted as to developments. Kate. I wish you the best. Hopefully you can make this happen quickly before the distributed exchanges come online. Are Ciphermine shares going to be 1:1 with the shares in the new exchange? |
|
|
|
If you are unfamiliar with Bitcoin agents I would take a look at these resources: Anyways here is my rough mock-up of the index page. Just trying to solicit some feedback as a work this little project.  So how will this work? If I'm a human being can I sell storage space to StorJ and get paid in proportionate amount when StorJ is ready to upgrade? If that is the case it could have as much space available as necessary to meet the demand simply by paying users to supply to meet the demand. And if anyone needs to store anything they could pay the price as well. Seems to be very efficient and could easily put Dropbox and Mega out of business. |
|
|
|
And just wait, artificial intelligence via neuromophic computing technology will allow for smart autonomous swarms. |
|
|
|
|
How much is 1000 MSC going for?
|
|
|
|
New question-
Will they actually do a Q&A?
Where is the money? And do you have accounting for every dollar spent? |
|
|
|
I know this does not prove much (I guess if you know how bad I am with photoshop it might) and I guess I was also off on my average purchase price but I did promise a screenshot of my 30k share holding so here it is. (sorry for the delay I had a lot of IRL things this weekend).  I have also been asked why I would hold on to the shares and I think my best answer would be that no matter what some people think I consider myself to have moral and integrity, and even though I don't have any insider info I think that I owe it to the community to hold on to the shares. I still don't think that Labcoin is a scam (bad communication? Yes. Bad luck/hardware problems, team issues? Yes and very possible.) but no matter what I think, as someone who have relayed the info give I deserve to share the risk with the rest of the investors. It's a start. This is what we needed to see to know you're willing to cooperate with the community if it turns out to be a scam. |
|
|
|
Our great CEO has been absent from the forum for 24 hours now, must be working on the next big scam project?
They are in get-away mode. They are trying to put responsibility on other people, like a random African guy from Uganda called Samuel Noi who does not seem to have any direct connection to Bitcoin but who happens to be interested in banking & finance with a degree in communications. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/samuel-noi/55/11/b72I'm not claiming this is the same Samuel Noi as associated with Labcoin, I'm saying this is the Samuel Noi who popped up when I Google "Samuel Noi". |
|
|
|
Like Ytterbium said. At this point, even though I got most my shares at close to IPO, they've lost so much in value, I'd be having scraps if I sold. Might as well wait it out. 90% loss or 100% loss makes no difference to me. In the astronomical chance this will actually turn into something - which I doubt strongly at this point, even for an optimist as myself - I might as well just sit on the shares.
This is how you bring your emotions into the situation. Everyone is proving this is scam. You are an Optimist, but even as a self identified optimist you see no hope in this. You rather just lose it all then lose a most it. You are contradicting yourself. If you were a true optimist you would rid yourself of the situation and look for greener pastures. There is NO hope in this, the only hope of salvation is to get what you can back as soon as possible. Why go down with the ship when the CEO abandoned you so long ago; when he can't spend 10mins on the forums to talk to his investors. Get the hell off the ship as soon as possible. This is super simple stuff. Not quite. The outlook isn't good for labcoin, but it hasn't been confirmed to be a scam. If the probability of success (however small) * return of success > current price, then you should hold. It just depends on your risk appetite. What ferskvare is referring to is called 'sunk cost'. Are you in on it? You're confirmed to have done trades with Alessia so I don't think anyone can take your investment advice seriously. You have more credibility than TheSwede at this point because you posted pictures. TheSwede promised to post a redacted picture of his btct portfolio in order to restore his credibility and he did not. Samuel Noi promised to do a Q&A and he did not. I'm not surprised that either of them broke their promises because they are confirmed liars. Liars are much more likely to be scammers because in order to be a scammer you have to be a liar first. Here is the confirmation that both TheSwede and Samuel Noi are willing to lie to the Bitcoin community and are non-cooperative. I just wanted to visit real quick and let people know that I will not be moderating or participating in the IRC Q/A. I was for a long time, and would still be happy to relay news for Labcoin but the fact is that I have had very little to report lately and had to withstand quite a few accusations from several people on the forum.
Without information to provide, and having been put in a situation where I had to "break my word" several times to simply to lack of communication i have full understanding that investors and the public in general is upset but the fact is that I have never had any inside information on the project and have always just attempted to relay the status and information that I have been provided with.
For what it's worth I still don't see any reason to believe the project is a Scam and I myself have not, and do not intend to sell the shares I own.
This post is not means as critique towards Labcoin, but I feel that to regain confidence the Labcoin team themselves need to answer the questions from the forum directly so that there is just no possibility for any misunderstanding or miscommunication.
Prove it. Make your portfolio public. If you do not then you've done nothing to change the opulent perception the community has of you. I own other shares then Labcoin and prefer not to make my portfolio public, but to give some insight I can say that I currently own 30.000 shares in Labcoin at an average purchase price of around 0.0027. Given that I purchased shares in the IPO and did sell some several weeks ago I will likely still end up making some Coin but I can assure you that any idea that I would have made anywhere even remotely close to 900BTC is absolutely false. As for holding the shares still, I feel that the Project still has a chance of turning a bad situation around. Only time will tell if I am correct of course. I don't accuse you of making 900BTC. Can you post a screen shot of your portfolio and redact everything except for the Labcoin portion? That would be enough to satisfy us. We do not want to invade your privacy. We just want some transparency with so much money on the line and so many dreams at stake. If you have 30,000 shares then you know how it feels to see the price going to 0.00001 with no indication of recovery or even an exchange. I am mobile right now and with no Yubikey access (my choice of 2 factor) but can definitely post a screenshot of this in a few hours at the latest. And I totally understand how people feel. With my purchase average I can't say that the current stock price makes me smile even the least. I guess it's okay to allow them to play with your money, buy Rolex watches and cars, live the opulent life with 900 Bitcoins while telling everyone to buy cheap shares and lying claiming they have 30,000 shares without giving any proof? They make these insulting and disgusting promises just so they can break them and laugh about it. A sucker is born every minute. Their non-cooperation and continued lying proves that Labcoin is a scam and TheSwede is unwilling to prove he's not a willing participant in the scam. His credibility is now lost.
I am not qualified in hardware development, i do have a general IT background and have managed several software development projects.
We will try our best to reply all questions during the session tomorrow.
Samuel Noi, your credibility is lost. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
