I dont know if its possible to have a functioning economy without enforcing property rights and contracts. What we have seen is people constantly breaking contracts with no recourse for anyone who has one broken. The question is how can you use bitcoin and make people stick to the contracts they sign ? imho if the minimal function of government is to enforce contracts and ensure property rights. Government is just a(n) (arguably poor) monopoly provider of these services. A requirement for an IPO or listing on anything above pink market should be designation of arbitration and insurance services providers. The current political environment and early stage of the bitcoin game makes it difficult to provide these services in a meaningful way yet but also clearly provides opportunity to profit for those with a penchant for creative solutions possibly even making use of Distributed contracts |
|
|
|
|
Dividend payments have been consistent and on time. Moparguy could be a lot more communicative and do a better job on the contract to improve share price to the point of selling more at the ipo price and growing the company.
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, giving away your bitcoin to HYIP scammers is not "growing the economy" nor "supporting bitcoin businesses", unlikely you call ponzi scamming a business. Unless you do due diligence and invest in *real* projects, not "arbitrage" and "mining farms". Maybe when so-called investors stop being so willing to get scammed, it will be worthwhile for entrepreneurs to start actual businesses instead of more HYIP funds.
I agree mostly but I'm pretty sure mining bitcoin is a real business in any rational sense of the word. Granted that fixed m/hash bonds seem pretty useless in an environment of rapid difficulty increase and evolving technology like we've seen recently. What "real" business" do you invest in? or do you just leave it in the blockchain? |
|
|
|
You were all warned that exactly this would happen. But instead of keeping the bitcoin safe in the blockchain, refused to believe it and chose to do absolutely nothing. Just kept waiting and waiting, until it was gone. How is that commendable?
Bullshit. cytokine and the investors in this fund (myself included) were very aware of the pirate risk and did everything possible to avoid exposure. Keeping bitcoin safe in the blockchain? really? So instead of growing the economy and supporting bitcoin businesses we're supposed to hoard it all away where it does nothing but sit there? The problem so far has been fraudulent activities by trusted members, not people wanting to support the fledgling economy and willing to take some risk. very aware of the pirate risk? I have quotes of cytokine saying a pirate default was "highly unlikely". He did everything he could to stay in denial because the returns were Too Good To Be True. What are NON-goals for the fund?(1) excessive risk taking for those chasing high return (2) To consider IPO shares of unestablished issuers. If you're interested in playing the IPO game, then you should invest elsewhere. However, despite this, we will likely have indirect exposure to IPOs since we do consider other funds (i.e. we are a fund-of-funds when it makes sense) which may themselves specialize and invest in IPOs. (3) rapid and frequent withdrawals or deposits (4) to be an "income" fund - if you want current income, then buy bonds. MOVETO.FUND is a growth fund, not an income fund. (5) to be a "passthrough" for pirate. The fund will not knowingly expose itself to any pirate default risk.What is the current share contract?See here. Please post any other questions you have here and I will amend the FAQ as necessary. |
|
|
|
You were all warned that exactly this would happen. But instead of keeping the bitcoin safe in the blockchain, refused to believe it and chose to do absolutely nothing. Just kept waiting and waiting, until it was gone. How is that commendable?
Bullshit. cytokine and the investors in this fund (myself included) were very aware of the pirate risk and did everything possible to avoid exposure. Keeping bitcoin safe in the blockchain? really? So instead of growing the economy and supporting bitcoin businesses we're supposed to hoard it all away where it does nothing but sit there? The problem so far has been fraudulent activities by trusted members, not people wanting to support the fledgling economy and willing to take some risk. |
|
|
|
Move to Barbados, Cayman Islands, Ecuador, Estonia, Isle of Man, Singapore or any other country without any capital gains tax. You could also become a sovereign citizen and hop around the planet with multiple residencies and passports.
Sovereign citizen is an oxymoron. I am sure that was your intent right? I think his intent was the perpetual traveler theory for Sovereign Individuals (which you should read!). Thanks for the correction. I was aware of the distinction but overlooked it at the time of writing. |
|
|
|
|
You have every right to be pissed at the dishonesty displayed and nothing to be sorry for cytokine. Any successful trading strategy is dependent on a foundation of half decently trustworthy issuers. The majority of GLBSE offerings at this emergent stage have a ways to go yet to put it mildly. I'm still optimistic for the future and feel that recent events have shown who is who and served as a wake up call going forward. I'm confident these markets will bring real innovation and profits and already have in some cases.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't government's Keynesian fiscal policies effectively "eat your children" by placing ever increasing debt upon them?
|
|
|
|
You're finding superficial trivial similarities, exaggerating them, and ignoring the substance.
...which is great for trolling, but not much else. |
|
|
|
|
AnCap has as its central principle the NAP. I would say that organized crime is philosophically closer to the statist model than AnCap due to the willingness to commit aggressive acts or fraud toward peaceful people for financial gain. Protection schemes are pretty much identical regardless of the "legitimacy" of the organization if the contract is involuntary, signed under duress, or coerced. AnCaps generally promote a model of protection or dispute resolution supplied by market actors who rely on a positive reputation and results to attract voluntary contracts for service.
|
|
|
|
imo this is the most undervalued mining stock right now. the stock is almost fully verified and if you do the math on the dividends per currently paying share, you are getting 3.5% yield per week at current prices. do the calculation on paid out shares and you are buying the equivalent of 10 mhash per share at this difficulty, and its not even a fixed mhash bond. Compare this to other mining stocks and it blows them out of the water.
There are a couple drawbacks though: the issuer holds 60k shares that could be dumped on the market at any time, so this adds a little uncertainty for future price and payouts. Also people don't know much about the issuer, not much reputation, so I think that scares some people off.
Great analysis. I agree with the exception that should the new motion pass it will bring dividend down to 2.5% with the remaining 1% added to expansion of farm. I see that as a positive though as it should keep dividend up as difficulty increases. If the issuer is transparent and communicative I can see this being a very popular security as reputation increases. I am a little concerned with the buyback option in the contract and it seems like it has been used before as there have been fewer shares payed out some weeks than previous weeks in the dividend record. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the input folks. I'll be buying more as well if whoever it is keep dumping the "turds"  |
|
|
|
|
so why the recent sell off of shares? is it the new motion? full moon?
|
|
|
|
|
yep, for everyone who "cashes out" there is someone who cashes in.
|
|
|
|
I don't take a "death to scammers" approach, but I am a libertarian, and I do believe government should exist to punish fraud. A lot of these scams would, in the presence of a jury, classify as fraud, and punishment should be doled out accordingly.
Would you be open to non-monopoly providers of this service? If competition is beneficial in markets, why not the realm of justice or dispute resolution? RE: OP I have a vested interest both financially and philosophically in the bitcoin economy and I would rather add to that economy with productive behavior than harm it. |
|
|
|
|
DROs are an overlooked necessity for bitcoin as an economy that tends to refrain from using monopoly service providers like the gov't courts which are both highly expensive and have almost zero incentive to provide amicable remedy. I applaud your efforts myrkul and would consider entering either competitively or cooperatively in time when I have built sufficient reputation.
|
|
|
|
Ratings would be helpful and so would more in the area of DROs (dispute resolution organization). I am aware of judge.me but not much else but arbitration is obviously an important component of moving forward in bitcoin based business. I'd like to see more contracts with more attention to how disputes will be resolved. I would also like to take a moment to reaffirm my strong belief in integrity, transparency, and communication, which are all things that Pirate lacked, regardless of if he's just a plain-old scammer or just a guy whose overly risky financial bets went wrong. +1 This is an ethic which will lead to long term riches far beyond what a pirate could imagine... plus the benefit of the ability to look in the mirror with esteem. |
|
|
|
|
Finding solutions for problems is always a more efficient use of energy than worry or guilt.
|
|
|
|
|
Good to know. At almost 20% growth since IPO I'd like to say that is an A-game if I ever saw one. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
