its getting tiresome...
Very tiresome for scammers who issue or promote ICOs. Why are you against "investors" having access to information so they can decide for themselves? Are you against full disclosure? |
|
|
|
Crypto could be illegalized everywhere and we would still be able to use it, they could have stopped it in 2009 but now it's too late. No matter what we will be able to use and trade crypto.
I would not worry about this.
You apparently haven't read the linked blog. Cryptocurrencies issued such that they aren't investment securities (such as issued with non-sneaky, fully competitive proof-of-work) are exempt from SEC and FinCEN regulations. All "ICO-issued" (and that includes obfuscating sneaky mine/burn scams such as Dash, Bytecoin, Byteball, etc) tokens will not function as cryptocurrencies for the reasons stated in the blog. If you're going to attempt to refute the blog, then please actually refute the points in the blog. |
|
|
|
CANADA to regulate ICO. RUSSIA is next?
The G20 has started to coordinate and harmonize their financial regulation and enforcement as originally announced would begin January 1. 2017. The details are in the blog linked below… I'm divesting (selling) all ICOs and never investing nor buying an "ICO-issued" token, because I don't want to go to jail or suffer massive fines and watch my investment collapse in the future: Are Most Cryptocurrencies Doomed to Collapse — because they’re “ICO-issued”? |
|
|
|
I don't think it was ever illegal for Americans to participate in ICOs. What has happened was that Securities and Exchange Commission declared that some of coins sold in ICOs are actually securities and therefore are subject to the agency's regulation. As a result companies conducting ICOs voluntarily ban US customers, because they don't want to be subjected to SEC regulation. And the result of that regulation is the "ICO-issued" tokens can't function as cryptocurrencies. The details: Are Most Cryptocurrencies Doomed to Collapse — because they’re “ICO-issued”? |
|
|
|
From https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/26we1g/why_monero_and_not_bytecoin/fluffyponyza said : The blockchain was not publicly observable or observed for those 2 years. We have no reason to believe it is true, and even if it was true it still means that ~151 billion of the 184 billion BCN (82%) were mined prior to its public release. Think about that pragmatically. Would you want to use a currency where unknown actors controlled over 80% of it? This alone takes Bytecoin from being decentralised to being centralised by virtue of those controlling the flow of the currency. Is it True ? If it's True then Holy Mother of God.......... Yes that post is absolutely true. So serious Why does someone need badly this 82%?
Greed and stupidity (with a healthy dose of deep-seated and pervasive dishonesty making it all possible, and making anything else they say unworthy of being believed). Which ostensibly makes Bytecoin an obfuscated "ICO-issued" illegal investment security. |
|
|
|
I don't think it's illegal for citizens, more like it's illegal for icos to sell to US citizens who not accredited investors.
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2017-131"The Report confirms that issuers of distributed ledger or blockchain technology-based securities must register offers and sales of such securities unless a valid exemption applies. Those participating in unregistered offerings also may be liable for violations of the securities laws"Bloody hell. Thanks for sharing that link. Here's a quote from the full SEC text found at: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdfMoreover, those who participate in an unregistered offer and sale of securities not subject
to a valid exemption are liable for violating Section 5. See, e.g., Murphy, 626 F.2d at 650-51
(“[T]hose who ha[ve] a necessary role in the transaction are held liable as participants.”) (citing
SEC v. North Am. Research & Dev. Corp., 424 F.2d 63, 81 (2d Cir. 1970); SEC v. Culpepper,
270 F.2d 241, 247 (2d Cir. 1959); SEC v. International Chem. Dev. Corp., 469 F.2d 20, 28 (10th
Cir. 1972); Pennaluna & Co. v. SEC, 410 F.2d 861, 864 n.1, 868 (9th Cir. 1969)); SEC v.
Softpoint, Inc., 958 F. Supp 846, 859-60 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (“The prohibitions of Section 5 …
sweep[] broadly to encompass ‘any person’ who participates in the offer or sale of an
unregistered, non-exempt security.”); SEC v. Chinese Consol. Benevolent Ass’n., 120 F.2d 738,
740-41 (2d Cir. 1941) (defendant violated Section 5(a) “because it engaged in selling
unregistered securities” issued by a third party “when it solicited offers to buy the securities ‘for
value’”). It's even bloodier than that: Are Most Cryptocurrencies Doomed to Collapse — because they’re “ICO-issued”? |
|
|
|
This is not the first "abandonned" coin where I see a community that is ready to invest a little bit to have someone deliver code and make releases again for the coin.
Obviously some people would be ready to pay a little for this.
Nobody really cares about this project anymore. Bagholders will say anything in order to dump on naive. Did you not see my prior post? Wanna donate? |
|
|
|
we need proof of your sanity first.  The proof is already public. You just haven't paid attention. CFB, what is the time table of getting it turned off and the tangle truly being in the wild?
Everyone will decide for himself. IOTA is decentralized after all, so we can't decide for the others. Double-speak was the theme of 1984. Astute readers can figure out that of course no one will decide not to use the centralized Coordinator, because they will not risk not getting their transactions in the centralized consensus. |
|
|
|
I do believe
What shills believe doesn't buy fucks. You have proven or shown nothing to refute that their technology doesn't have consensus without a centralized Coordinator. |
|
|
|
Foreign ICOs are still culpable if they don't take identification and insure they aren't allowing US citizens/residents to avail of the ICO. The likely outcome is not only legal woes for both yourself and the ICO issuers (as the G20 gets coordinated on this), but also delisting of the ICO tokens and confiscation of the tokens on exchanges within the G20's jurisdictional reach (and they can compel most smaller nations as well). There is a detailed thread already about this: The @end_is_near for the ICO bubble. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
