It is easy to say "the information is out there" but it isn't always easy to find everything especially for people (such as Tone and Trace) who are involved with a lot of different activities and have limited time to spend researching any particular coin.
That`s why I had suggested you compile a document with all the info you consider vital to be put on Dash.org. I would support that. I am all in favor of transparency and imho the DASH team has nothing to hide. Of course (audiatur est altera pars), the DASH team would be allowed to a response. In case you kept bitching about the instamine after that, it would help the poor new investors in determing what your agenda actually is. Who knows, maybe you and your buddies are the ones they should be warned about? That information has already been compiled: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0smooth don't fall for this disingenuous game. This is a well known obfuscation tactic. The opposer will demand you do more work to repeat the work you already did, and will demand this over and over again even after you repeat it N times, until you get tired and give up. |
|
|
|
It`s just that I am appaled by his hypocrisy. I would not waste my time on internet forums if I was witnessing alleged crimes comparable to rape and murder (his words) but go straight to the authorities.
You said it is all about freedom. I retorted you by pointing out that society decides which actions are free to do and not to do. I am being consistent in my logic. You are being arbitrary. You want to obey, respect, and enforce society's laws against rape and murder, yet you want to disobey, disrespect, and avoid enforcement of society's laws against selling hyped investment securities to n00bs. Sometimes civil disobedience is justified. But how can you justify fooling n00bs for your own profit in a zero-sum game. There is no idealistic outcome from that. It is a race to the gutter. If you continue to be disingenuous in your argumentation, I will just ignore you as impossible to have a rational debate with. Ceti can guide you with irrational and disingenuous logic. Edit: I caught him being disingenuous again: It is easy to say "the information is out there" but it isn't always easy to find everything especially for people (such as Tone and Trace) who are involved with a lot of different activities and have limited time to spend researching any particular coin.
That`s why I had suggested you compile a document with all the info you consider vital to be put on Dash.org. I would support that. I am all in favor of transparency and imho the DASH team has nothing to hide. Of course (audiatur est altera pars), the DASH team would be allowed to a response. In case you kept bitching about the instamine after that, it would help the poor new investors in determing what your agenda actually is. Who knows, maybe you and your buddies are the ones they should be warned about? That information has already been compiled: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0smooth don't fall for this disingenuous game. This is a well known obfuscation tactic. The opposer will demand you do more work to repeat the work you already did, and will demand this over and over again even after you repeat it N times, until you get tired and give up. |
|
|
|
The problem here appears to be incompatible cultures.
Wow! What a politically correct post! No more "USA is superior and all Russians are crooks" vibe? It seems my words have penetrated that wall of insanity in your head. Yeah I really wanted to reply to this too. But, I won't post in this thread, before Charles and Alex do A difference in culture doesn't necessarily imply someone is a crook. What I have observed thus far since I got into crypto-currency (which has been my first exposure to Russians and Eastern Europeans), many of you on this forum appear to have a different system of values than we typically do in the USA and not just about investments. Someone even said your governments had a law against everything, so they learned that laws are made to be broken. Whereas, Americans (perhaps excluding inner city poverty regions) are generally under the impression that a lawful society is a more just and well-functioning society. I am not claiming that ideology is positive, because in fact the USA imprisons more people per capita than any nation on earth and many ostensibly incorrectly imprisoned. And I even know that much business law is abused by the powers-that-be. Nevertheless, I also don't like our software development industry to be dragged into the mud of fly-by-night promotional scams. The defensive way you reacted to my speculation is I think quite telling. You accuse me when it is both of you who are selling, marketing, promoting, or defending the selling of ICOs to USA n00bs in defiance of our securities laws. I didn't make that decision for you. It might just be a statistical fluke (small sample size) that we have a high correlation between developers from that Communist culture involved with public ICOs which haven't blacklisted USA n00bs (which our law appears to require). I'd respect you both much more if you were out there creating great software, raising money from private placement to launch profitable ventures, then selling stocks through the legal venues such as Seedr. Or I'd respect you both for doing pure open source contribution not for profit, if that is your preference. But I don't respect the marriage of software development with Pink Sheet stock speculation. Software development isn't fly-by-night gold and silver mining companies and other crap listed on the Pink Sheets. And those listed on the Pink Sheets do at least abide by our securities laws. When Charles says you don't yet have the governance structure set up, I presume he is alluding to the fact that you ostensibly don't even have an attorney advising you properly. And I don't blame him for not wanting his reputation to be associated with entirely unregulated selling of " slices of the next big thing" to unsophisticated investors who can't discern technological fact from hype. I don't personally have anything against Russian culture (I'm even a bit curious about it). But if I continue to see that people from (former) Communist countries don't have basic common sense about how to operate in the international business arena on any scale other than some fly-by-night promotions, then I will eventually start to be forewarned about being cautious. |
|
|
|
The problem here appears to be incompatible cultures.
Wow! What a politically correct post! No more "USA is superior and all Russians are crooks" vibe? It seems my words have penetrated that wall of insanity in your head. Yeah I really wanted to reply to this too. But, I won't post in this thread, before Charles and Alex do A difference in culture doesn't necessarily imply someone is a crook. What I have observed thus far since I got into crypto-currency (which has been my first exposure to Russians and Eastern Europeans), many of you on this forum appear to have a different system of values than we typically do in the USA and not just about investments. Someone even said your governments had a law against everything, so they learned that laws are made to be broken. Whereas, Americans (perhaps excluding inner city poverty regions) are generally under the impression that a lawful society is a more just and well-functioning society. I am not claiming that ideology is positive, because in fact the USA imprisons more people per capita than any nation on earth and many ostensibly incorrectly imprisoned. And I even know that much business law is abused by the powers-that-be. Nevertheless, I also don't like our software development industry to be dragged into the mud of fly-by-night promotional scams. The defensive way you reacted to my speculation is I think quite telling. You accuse me when it is both of you who are selling, marketing, promoting, or defending the selling of ICOs to USA n00bs in defiance of our securities laws. I didn't make that decision for you. It might just be a statistical fluke (small sample size) that we have a high correlation between developers from that Communist culture involved with public ICOs which haven't blacklisted USA n00bs (which our law appears to require). I'd respect you both much more if you were out there creating great software, raising money from private placement to launch profitable ventures, then selling stocks through the legal venues such as Seedr. Or I'd respect you both for doing pure open source contribution not for profit, if that is your preference. But I don't respect the marriage of software development with Pink Sheet stock speculation. Software development isn't fly-by-night gold and silver mining companies and other crap listed on the Pink Sheets. And those listed on the Pink Sheets do at least abide by our securities laws. When Charles says you don't yet have the governance structure set up, I presume he is alluding to the fact that you ostensibly don't even have an attorney advising you properly. And I don't blame him for not wanting his reputation to be associated with entirely unregulated selling of " slices of the next big thing" to unsophisticated investors who can't discern technological fact from hype. I don't personally have anything against Russian culture (I'm even a bit curious about it). But if I continue to see that people from (former) Communist countries don't have basic common sense about how to operate in the international business arena on any scale other than some fly-by-night promotions, then I will eventually start to be forewarned about being cautious. Edit: I recall one of my female classmates at the university was Russian. I believe she using me to help her improve her grade by studying along with me, knowing that I was attracted to her. I had forgotten about that. |
|
|
|
kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).
First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).
To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.
Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------
Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests.
Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.
I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.
@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.) If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role? His statement seems to imply this case, but what you are asking for him to do is the very thing he seems to want to avoid (and we don't know why, but probably some legal issues with IOHK). Not sure if the question makes sense. My (wild guess) opinion/speculation follows. I can read between the lines too, as many of you probably did also. Kushti is friends with Sasha. Kushti is a Russian who isn't hung up on formalities of laws we have in the West and is primarily interested in developing the code and having enough money to afford better lighting in his dingy apartment (this is a joke for anyone who has seen the Waves Hangout video). I guesstimate that Kushti doesn't have an ethical stance against ICOs and he probably thinks it was all just hunkydory. But then Charles probably explained that this is unacceptable for the company and for Charles personally being a USA citizen. So Kushti appears to be trying to ride the middle line. The problem here appears to be incompatible cultures. We appear to have different attitude in the West towards issues revolving around intellectual property, contracts, and investment laws. Charles hails from academia or math research, and he wants to form diverse and global ties. I am thinking he is bumping up against the sort of quagmires that can arise in international business. My stance is that Sasha needs to realize that if he wants to integrate with our hitech world in the West, then he needs to play ball within our more formal legal structures. I actually hate red tape and lawyering up. I love production and coding. So it is strange to see me taking this stance. I guess I have become very pragmatic at age 51. Alas I am not 20s and 30s carefree now. By not being careful, I encountered some big mistakes in my life. I am much more cautious. |
|
|
|
As for "scaring people etc": that`s what YOU keep doing by alleging "scam" and SEC prosecution all over the place.
Correct. I am trying to stop the scams. Is that bad? I am also helping the ICO issuers minimize their future problems by making sure investors were informed and thus "sophisticated". I am actually helping to reduce their potential future liability, because they can argue I was informing all the n00bs. Also by reducing the popularity of their ICOs, that is less money involved and so I presume less likely the SEC will bother. So you tried to scare me with libel because you don't want the illegal scams to stop. Careful. Be careful what you are promoting. |
|
|
|
You are not being told to do anything, at least not by me, as you insinuate. It`s just an advice I very well know you are not going to take.
There are multiple definitions of the word 'told'. It doesn't always mean 'commanded'. It can just be the past tense of 'tell' or 'inform', which was my intended meaning. Why would you think I would not take it when I already stated it was good advice. As for "scaring people etc": that`s what YOU keep doing by alleging "scam" and SEC prosecution all over the place.
Correct. I am trying to stop the scams. Is that bad? I am also helping the ICO issuers minimize their future problems by making sure investors were informed and thus "sophisticated". I am actually helping to reduce their potential future liability, because they can argue I was informing all the n00bs. Also by reducing the popularity of their ICOs, that is less money involved and so I presume less likely the SEC will bother. So you tried to scare me with libel because you don't want the illegal scams to stop. Careful. Be careful what you are promoting. GO CALL THE COPS if what you say is true! Go to the SEC! Isn`t it your duty after all? You are soooo worried about the poor "n00bs" here, so please, go the the SEC/CIA/NSA/US Army and please protect the shit out of everybody!
The SEC has its own determination of when they will crack down. I already quoted their January 2016 warning. They are aware already. I have postulated that they are first letting as many people incriminate themselves first, so as to maximize the dramatic effect when they do crackdown and snare as many criminally minded persons as they can. Afaik, the SEC usually doesn't get involved until the monetary sums are large. |
|
|
|
I am told to stop trying to inform investors and altcoin developers about the legal implications and instead exclusively expend my time on coding. Hey it isn't bad advice on that point, but I think it was also very necessary for me to understand this thread for my own plans and to the extent I can share it with others, I think that has been a positive action on my part: So the Synereo team is what exactly? Snakeoil Salesmen? Hypester? Pumpers?
Are you alleging that they are? What are the legal definitions of those terms? I was talking about the general legal matter and informally summarizing my IANAL understanding of the securities law and the purpose for the existence of the law. Do I think Synereo's ICO violated the law? Yes probably in my IANAL personal opinion. But that is just my opinion and I am free to express my opinion on a forum that exists to share opinions on matters such as these. And what has the "US Society" "decided" about libel?
Why don't you explain precisely by citing the case law the relevance of your question. It appears to be irrelevant to what I wrote in the prior post and appears to be an attempt to scare me into not expressing my opinions. Oh and how exactly does one compare an ICO to murder and rape?
On the abstraction notion of freedom. Society doesn't think we should be free to murder and rape. Society has also decided we should not be free to issue unregistered investment securities to "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors. That is the law. Go complain to society if you disagree. It is not my opinion that matters. I am confused
Obviously. , because at the ICO you can say "no" and not be harmed, while the point in murder and rape is that you can`t.
I didn't make the law. Society did. Society ostensibly feels that you can purchase a gun to defend yourself if you don't want to be murdered or raped. And society ostensibly feels that n00bs lack the information to make informed investment decisions and are easily suckered into being victims and thus in effect are actually psychologically powerless because they were salivating over getting rich quickly and lost their objectivity. BTW, for the records, I am a Synereo ICO "victim" myself. Must be stockholm syndrome, that I feel fine so far
The initial pump of Synereo was ostensibly very lucrative for the ICO investors. I am not surprised you are not crying. You are only angry now because punchbowl might be taken away. and I would even if Synereo turned out to be a total failure, because...well, that`s the risk one takes when investing and I could not find a single hint a fraudulent behavior by the team so far.
Thanks for being an example how n00bs are fooled. You didn't even conceive of the fact that selling an illegal security is already a fraud. And also you didn't know the facts I have been explaining about how slim the chances of Synereo's adoption really are. You were only fed the hype "Attention Model" will revolutionize... I am no native english speaker, so I am in no way able to compete with your rhetorical skills, it`s just that I can`t stand unfairness and libel.
Then you aren't going to respect USA securities law. I have noticed this that so many non-USA citizens here think they can give a middle finger to the SEC. You will as usual have the last (many many) words, but maybe you should spend more time proving the world what a genius you are with a real finished project/product, instead of spending your time pretending to protect people from what your competition does (and to call you a "competitor" is actually pretty generous, as you haven`t delivered ANYTHING as far as I can tell).
Competition? How is selling ICO vaporware competition? Is the Dash scam competition? Is the Bitshares scam competition? I already showed the statistics that these altcoins have no adoption (not even 1/1000th of Bitcoin's measily adoption). This is all mining the speculators. That is all it is. And you are fooled. |
|
|
|
So the Synereo team is what exactly? Snakeoil Salesmen? Hypester? Pumpers?
Are you alleging that they are? What are the legal definitions of those terms? I was talking about the general legal matter and informally summarizing my IANAL understanding of the securities law and the purpose for the existence of the law. Do I think Synereo's ICO violated the law? Yes probably in my IANAL personal opinion. But that is just my opinion and I am free to express my opinion on a forum that exists to share opinions on matters such as these. And what has the "US Society" "decided" about libel?
Why don't you explain precisely by citing the case law the relevance of your question. It appears to be irrelevant to what I wrote in the prior post and appears to be an attempt to scare me into not expressing my opinions. Oh and how exactly does one compare an ICO to murder and rape?
On the abstraction notion of freedom. Society doesn't think we should be free to murder and rape. Society has also decided we should not be free to issue unregistered investment securities to "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors. That is the law. Go complain to society if you disagree. It is not my opinion that matters. I am confused
Obviously. , because at the ICO you can say "no" and not be harmed, while the point in murder and rape is that you can`t.
I didn't make the law. Society did. Society ostensibly feels that you can purchase a gun to defend yourself if you don't want to be murdered or raped. And society ostensibly feels that n00bs lack the information to make informed investment decisions and are easily suckered into being victims and thus in effect are actually psychologically powerless because they were salivating over getting rich quickly and lost their objectivity. BTW, for the records, I am a Synereo ICO "victim" myself. Must be stockholm syndrome, that I feel fine so far
The initial pump of Synereo was ostensibly very lucrative for the ICO investors. I am not surprised you are not crying. You are only angry now because punchbowl might be taken away. and I would even if Synereo turned out to be a total failure, because...well, that`s the risk one takes when investing and I could not find a single hint a fraudulent behavior by the team so far.
Thanks for being an example how n00bs are fooled. You didn't even conceive of the fact that selling an illegal security is already a fraud. And also you didn't know the facts I have been explaining about how slim the chances of Synereo's adoption really are. You were only fed the hype "Attention Model" will revolutionize... I am no native english speaker, so I am in no way able to compete with your rhetorical skills, it`s just that I can`t stand unfairness and libel.
Then you aren't going to respect USA securities law. I have noticed this that so many non-USA citizens here think they can give a middle finger to the SEC. You will as usual have the last (many many) words, but maybe you should spend more time proving the world what a genius you are with a real finished project/product, instead of spending your time pretending to protect people from what your competition does (and to call you a "competitor" is actually pretty generous, as you haven`t delivered ANYTHING as far as I can tell).
Competition? How is selling ICO vaporware competition? Is the Dash scam competition? Is the Bitshares scam competition? I already showed the statistics that these altcoins have no adoption (not even 1/1000th of Bitcoin's measily adoption). This is all mining the speculators. That is all it is. And you are fooled. |
|
|
|
...visionary start-ups.
iCEBREAKER meme image incoming...  MLM Evon Duffocation reality distortion duffield is a possible theme. |
|
|
|
Quaint to see the [MRO] symbol from back then.
What that from when it was formerly alleged to be a dairy farm mining operation (in South Africa). Mroooneroooo.  |
|
|
|
I don't hate Synereo's people. I just wish they hadn't done a vaporware ICO, both for the legal reasons of selling unregistered investment securities to non-accredited USA investors apparently in violation of securities law as provided for by the Supreme Court's Howey test and simply because it is the antithesis of the objective ethics (i.e. no zero-sum games) of meritocratic software development to sell vaporware.
That`s so nice of you not to hate them. What I like about the vaporware AMPs is that no one has to buy them and at the same time people like you have no possibility to hinder me to do so. I can buy it as freely as I can ignore your T-Shirts. Freedom is awesome. Well originally that was my thought too given I am a minanarchist. I was very defiant of 2112's attempt to help me and ridiculed his attempt to teach me that I was incorrect. Today I was reminded to PM him a "mea culpa". Because the reality is that USA society (at least and probably simiilarly in other jurisdictions) has decided that snakeoil salesmen (i.e. hypesters and pumpers) have too much leverage over "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors, and thus has adjudicated that the selling (and ostensibly promoting) of ICOs to USA n00bs (residents or expat citizens) even when promulgated by foreign entities. I understand a prison sentence is a possibility. Meaning it is not freedom to allow murders and rapists. It is also not freedom to allow hypesters to prey on the ignorance of n00bs, or at least that is what society has decided. If the law changes, then we can talk about the new reality. Until then, I can't help create/code/develop freedom from prison. I suggest you go read the appropriate thread from start to finish: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14546242#msg14546242 |
|
|
|
But isnt the fact that its all traded for BTC, not standard fiat, changes the entire picture? Since bitcoin is not recognized as a currency in the usa (and europe..) No banks or private institutions are involved in the invesments' exchanges. fiat -> btc -> ico token - process, solves this issue imo. if it was a credit card / wire transfer, this would be an issue obviously. And I'll read the rest of the thread later on, it certainly got my interest  Again the Supreme Court decisions have more than once emphasized that they will look past obfuscating circumstances and make the determination based on the economic reality. So no, BTC's classification by any one has nothing to do with the fact that BTC can transfer value. The term 'value' is used in the Howey test, not only 'money'. Disclaimer: IANAL, so please consult your own. |
|
|
|
I've started reading your post (the first page), and the related one with the votes. I think I understand what you mean by illegal, correct me if im wrong, You say that ICO's can be illegal if their tokens are ecosystem related or not, and if their buying price is significant or not. actually I voted for option 4, stating its illegal only if its a significant cost without use in the coin's ecosystem. But since this entire market is still unregulated, and maybe it cant be.. yet. So if there's no law about it. its neither legal nor illegal. Thanks and have a nice weekend btw  Thanks agreed happy we cooled it down. Same to you. Your understanding appears to be entirely off in an incorrect direction. It doesn't have anything to do with the coin's ecosystem afaics. Rather it all hinges on whether the n00b investors are basing their expectations of future profit on the future actions of a centralized entity (i.e. the issuers of the ICO and the developers). That is what 'security' means, i.e the centralized entity is 'securing' your future profit. Note I originally started that linked discussion thinking that one could do an ICO as long as they did not use that raised money in the enterprise of making the project ongoing and if they gave up managerial control. 2112 was more knowledgeable about the law and was steering me to the Howey test so I could learn that I was incorrect. So I actually started out ignorant. As I studied the issue more in depth, I realized that just about any ICO sold to "unsophisticated, non-accredited" (<-- legal terms with definitions) USA investors is ostensibly illegal and the issuers of the ICO (and potentially also the accomplice promoters) are subject to SEC action even if they are foreign entities. The test that is applied to determine whether an investment vehicle is a regulated investment security under USA law, is known as the Supreme Court's Howey test. In the thread I linked for you, the requirements of the test are discussed in great detail. I suggest reading the entire thread so you don't miss any of the nuanced points. ICO is not illegal, it's just crowdfunding. If you do some projections about future profits this is illegal.
Actually when you do ICO you're selling a product - token in a value transfer system.
That is sort of what I originally thought, but then I realized I was wrong. The Supreme Court has said it will look past all obfuscations to the economic reality of whether the n00b investors were basing their expectations of future profit on the future actions of the centralized party issuing the tokens and developing the enterprise which the investors are investing in. Realize I am doing you a big favor. Cancel the ICO immediately and keep yourself out of trouble. Stay focused on being a developer and not involve yourself in this legal tarpit. But isnt the fact that its all traded for BTC, not standard fiat, changes the entire picture? Since bitcoin is not recognized as a currency in the usa (and europe..) No banks or private institutions are involved in the invesments' exchanges. fiat -> btc -> ico token - process, solves this issue imo. if it was a credit card / wire transfer, this would be an issue obviously. And I'll read the rest of the thread later on, it certainly got my interest Again the Supreme Court decisions have more than once emphasized that they will look past obfuscating circumstances and make the determination based on the economic reality. So no, BTC's classification by any one has nothing to do with the fact that BTC can transfer value. The term 'value' is used in the Howey test, not only 'money'. Disclaimer: IANAL, so please consult your own. I don't hate Synereo's people. I just wish they hadn't done a vaporware ICO, both for the legal reasons of selling unregistered investment securities to non-accredited USA investors apparently in violation of securities law as provided for by the Supreme Court's Howey test and simply because it is the antithesis of the objective ethics (i.e. no zero-sum games) of meritocratic software development to sell vaporware.
That`s so nice of you not to hate them. What I like about the vaporware AMPs is that no one has to buy them and at the same time people like you have no possibility to hinder me to do so. I can buy it as freely as I can ignore your T-Shirts. Freedom is awesome. Well originally that was my thought too given I am a minanarchist. I was very defiant of 2112's attempt to help me and ridiculed his attempt to teach me that I was incorrect. Today I was reminded to PM him a "mea culpa". Because the reality is that USA society (at least and probably simiilarly in other jurisdictions) has decided that snakeoil salesmen (i.e. hypesters and pumpers) have too much leverage over "unsophisticated, non-accredited" USA investors, and thus has adjudicated that the selling (and ostensibly promoting) of ICOs to USA n00bs (residents or expat citizens) even when promulgated by foreign entities. I understand a prison sentence is a possibility. Meaning it is not freedom to allow murders and rapists. It is also not freedom to allow hypesters to prey on the ignorance of n00bs, or at least that is what society has decided. If the law changes, then we can talk about the new reality. Until then, I can't help create/code/develop freedom from prison. I suggest you go read the appropriate thread from start to finish: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14546242#msg14546242 |
|
|
|
I've started reading your post (the first page), and the related one with the votes. I think I understand what you mean by illegal, correct me if im wrong, You say that ICO's can be illegal if their tokens are ecosystem related or not, and if their buying price is significant or not. actually I voted for option 4, stating its illegal only if its a significant cost without use in the coin's ecosystem. But since this entire market is still unregulated, and maybe it cant be.. yet. So if there's no law about it. its neither legal nor illegal. Thanks and have a nice weekend btw Thanks agreed happy we cooled it down. Same to you. Your understanding appears to be entirely off in an incorrect direction. It doesn't have anything to do with the coin's ecosystem afaics. Rather it all hinges on whether the n00b investors are basing their expectations of future profit on the future actions of a centralized entity (i.e. the issuers of the ICO and the developers). That is what 'security' means, i.e the centralized entity is 'securing' your future profit. Note I originally started that linked discussion thinking that one could do an ICO as long as they did not use that raised money in the enterprise of making the project ongoing and if they gave up managerial control. 2112 was more knowledgeable about the law and was steering me to the Howey test so I could learn that I was incorrect. So I actually started out ignorant. As I studied the issue more in depth, I realized that just about any ICO sold to "unsophisticated, non-accredited" (<-- legal terms with definitions) USA investors is ostensibly illegal and the issuers of the ICO (and potentially also the accomplice promoters) are subject to SEC action even if they are foreign entities. The test that is applied to determine whether an investment vehicle is a regulated investment security under USA law, is known as the Supreme Court's Howey test. In the thread I linked for you, the requirements of the test are discussed in great detail. I suggest reading the entire thread so you don't miss any of the nuanced points. ICO is not illegal, it's just crowdfunding. If you do some projections about future profits this is illegal.
Actually when you do ICO you're selling a product - token in a value transfer system.
That is sort of what I originally thought, but then I realized I was wrong. The Supreme Court has said it will look past all obfuscations to the economic reality of whether the n00b investors were basing their expectations of future profit on the future actions of the centralized party issuing the tokens and developing the enterprise which the investors are investing in. Realize I am doing you a big favor. Cancel the ICO immediately and keep yourself out of trouble. Stay focused on being a developer and not involve yourself in this legal tarpit. |
|
|
|
I showed the high school level probability math that masternodes make InstantX insecure...Masternodes destroy the network effects that a coin needs to attain adoption. Thats strange. I wonder why he didn’t listen. The thing is, bedroom wannabees that "nearly" wrote the new Microsoft Word and spend all day long trashing real projects on bitconitalk form such a rich source of authoritative technical appraisal. Evan should understand that. Maybe if you re-assert your awesome pedigree he'll entertain you (You've sure entertained us). Quoted for posterity, so we can refer to this in retrospect when we can more clearly see who was the (ad hominem hurling[1]) fool here. Btw, Evan did reply on my thread and did not deny the math error. He tried to claim it was an honest mistake, yeah right.  Then he disappeared upon being challenged. [1] I suppose that is the first listed "talent" on your resume. I've never seen you respond factually nor display any significant technical acumen. |
|
|
|
What do you mean by " illegal investment securities to non-accredited USA investors "?
Are you serious? what's illegal here? the ico? WHAT?
These kind of childish acts are exactly whats holding progress BACK in all crypto world.
This is mine..This is yours.. grow up.
Your (boastful) ignorance is the problem. Read again the resource I cited upthread. Oh, you come from a family of lawyers. Its all becoming clear to me now, the insults and your "elite" way. Yeah.. Man you are oversimplifying. I am a minanarchist. Last time I checked (as far as I know), my father and I don't agree on most things (although I suspect he would respect my insights if he had time to absorb them, but maybe not also since I am more theoretical/abstractly based than he is). I don't have any elitist pedigree in me. I am (one of) the black sheep in the family (actually on further reflection, I think the entire family is composed of black sheep, lol). Go read the link I provided and learn something. Those of us who want to create successful projects, know we can't do so from prison. |
|
|
|
What do you mean by " illegal investment securities to non-accredited USA investors "?
Are you serious? what's illegal here? the ico? WHAT?
These kind of childish acts are exactly whats holding progress BACK in all crypto world.
This is mine..This is yours.. grow up.
Your (boastful) ignorance is the problem. Read again the resource I cited upthread. |
|
|
|
did the monero wrote that fact about infinite supply in their ann Huh if i was an investard in monero i would feel cheated if it isnt
No one can fork Monero without the support of the decentralized miners. The distinction from the Dash masternode scam, is that a masternode is staked only once with DRK (Dash tokens) and earns 50+% ROI per annum forever after for the largest holders of Dash tokens, thus further centralizing the coin meaning there is a centralized oligarchy which the investors are relying on for their future expecation of profits which afaics fulfills the Howey test for what is an investment security that is regulated by the Securities Act. A decentralized PoW miner is constantly expending on electricity in a competitive free market. Owning a lot of Monero doesn't give you any leverage as a miner. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
