What exactly is supposed to be smart about investing in an asset with a price destined to decrease rather than assets with the potential for 10x and 100x increases?

Not to discredit the potential of Labcoin, but the community response to this IPO reminds me an awful lot of behaviour in the alt coin forum when a new coin pops up... especially the likes of feathercoin and chinacoin

Phew, thank goodness I rolled out of bed and checked these forums. I think I have got my bid in place at the regular IPO price.. lets hope it is first come first serve, not just from the top down.

So you're saying that even those orders submitted above the 0.001 price will be filled in the order they were placed? There's no danger of my shares already bid at 0.001 being displaced by late high bids if the IPO is oversubscribed?
I couldn't find any info about the procedure for IPOs on btct - do you know this from experience or is it specified somewhere?

Interesting to see this play out - what happens if more bids are placed then shares when the IPO occurs?  Are the shares divided evenly based on order size, or is it first-come first serve (Which would defeat the purpose of the lock, as far as I can tell)

burnside should limit how many shares a person can purchase (although that can be manipulated by opening up several accounts)
it appears people just want to pick up shares assuming price will go up and dump as soon as it does.

people putting over the ipo price hoping those orders will get filled first and that the price bump will be significant. the things people do to make a buck

25 before last 2C means week 25.

You can't.  It's a security measure so that a hacker can't either.  
Make a new account, transfer shares.

I think at least 24 hours notice would be good as well.

Oh look. Big new wall appeared on btct.

I like the idea of a share index, to give a general feel of the BTC-markets. For your current setup, I would reevaluate the inclusion and/or weight of TAT.ASICMINER, since it is not excluded that that security isn't partially backed by ASICMINER-PT shares, which would cause them to be double-counted.

In general, I would like an index where ASICMINER has less effect on the index, but since this would not be an accurate representation of reality, I don't know if it's a good idea to tamper with the weight-function.

Funds and bonds I would not include. Funds are often baskets of other shares (mixed with some currency), which would cause more double-weighing. Bonds should not fluctuate in price and always trade close to their face value, so they don't serve a purpose in an index. There are the "mining bonds" (that aren't bonds) that are basically inverted difficulty futures and the price of them doesn't necessarily reflect the performance of the market.

Just stash them up ya arse mate

In my home country of America, the fundamental basis of law is that every act is LEGAL, unless there is a law that makes that act illegal.  Thailand’s fundamental basis of law is quite different – in Thailand, every act is ILLEGAL, unless there is a law (and process, and procedure) to make it legal.

Really man you just lost all credibility and can never gain it back. I hope this gets moved to speculation or maybe off topic.

In the west, we are more informed, so the government cant get away with random things like this. So thats the difference between uninformed people, and more or less well-informed people, its what their government gets away with.

And this is why my husband and I decided not to buy when BTC was only $1. We were afraid of being thrown in jail because we were tied to something that could be seen as tied to money laundering etc.

every step seems to come with a drop right before the rise.. get ready for an explosion upwards

I mean in the next couple of weeks. Beyond that, there is some mining gear to get going