GLBSE owners lied to us. How to move forward and fix this? Move to Exchange X?

[punningclan]

Wouldn't a p2p stock market solve this problem, the issue with GLBSE is excessive counterparty risk? With p2p the relationship could be handled entirely through Bitcoin and/or Namecoin (or an equivalent e.g. Stockcoin) addresses to maintain investor anonymity. Funds themselves coud be made anonymous by storing only address in the name value store.

[EskimoBob]

Wouldn't a p2p stock market solve this problem, the issue with GLBSE is excessive counterparty risk? With p2p the relationship could be handled entirely through Bitcoin and/or Namecoin (or an equivalent e.g. Stockcoin) addresses to maintain investor anonymity. Funds themselves coud be made anonymous by storing only address in the name value store.

Why do you chose a fake sec. in fake Co? What about crowd funding?

[usagi]

I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual  tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc". 
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if  you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people,  how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc.  Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.

So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828

Why are you spamming the forums, EskimoBob?

[matauc12]

I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual  tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc". 
American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if  you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people,  how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc.  Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.
If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.

So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828

Why are you spamming the forums, EskimoBob?

who's posting totally pointless post strictly aiming the poster and not the content?....

[EskimoBob]

I think the last comment is something that should really make you take a step back, look at the big picture and think.
 

Janek Richter

This is total nonsense. There are no AML and KYC requirements with Bitcoin in the UK because it is not money, the FSA have said that Bitcoin is not money and is not their concern in writing. The only thing that matters with regard to the law is what the authorities say in writing, and case law. In absentia of that, everything else, no matter who says it, is opinion without legal force.

If McCarthy has something to back up his claims in writing, he should present it, and then everyone can measure its worth accordingly. What a single lawyer says does not make law or a regulation for that matter. It is an opinion only. Even so, if his lawyer has given such an opinion, it would be interesting to see it, as it should have been given in writing and not casually over the phone. He does not even name who his firm is, and frankly, if you have some eighth rate firm of solicitors operating out of a shoe box above a chip shop, I would not take their advice on something as serious as this. Only a firm with the proper competence should be trusted to make an assessment of Bitcoin, and until we see that such a firm has given its opinion on this, in writing, then its all worthless hearsay and gossip.

There is a huge amount of delusion, hysteria and cult mentality in the Bitcoin forum. They talk to themselves and whip themselves up into a frenzy about things that no one outside of their ‘community’ cares about. Whats worse, they design services and implement tools to comply with non existing legislation based only on this frenzied, navel gazing, nonsense. This interview is a perfect example of this mindset; the nauseating air of delusional self importance drips off of the screen.

 Source http://bitcoinmagazine.net/interview-with-glbses-nefario/

[EskimoBob]

Look like GLBSE gand has started to move some coin around.
This is good but the show is not even close to the happy ending.
I am sure that the portfolio values are multiple times grater than coin held in GLBSE accounts.

1) Existing trading platform leads/owners have to step up and talk to issuers
2) Every issuers has to choose one they like (set up a poll, if you can not decide
3) GLBSE and the chosen platform owner has to work together to figure out, how to transfer the data and make sure it's correct too (md5 is helpful, third party to confirm that hashes match)
4) create accounts for shareholders in chosen platform
5) inform the shareholders via same e-mail that was used to start/confirm the coin transfers in GLBSE
6) GLBSE account holders receive a complete transaction history and holdings report. Last one must be signed by GLBSE 

I prefer platform that can exist independently and is not controlled by one person. Power corrupts and money makes people stupid. We have seen that way too many times in BTC community.

Cheers.

[Bitcoin Oz]

I think the last comment is something that should really make you take a step back, look at the big picture and think.
 

Janek Richter

This is total nonsense. There are no AML and KYC requirements with Bitcoin in the UK because it is not money, the FSA have said that Bitcoin is not money and is not their concern in writing. The only thing that matters with regard to the law is what the authorities say in writing, and case law. In absentia of that, everything else, no matter who says it, is opinion without legal force.

If McCarthy has something to back up his claims in writing, he should present it, and then everyone can measure its worth accordingly. What a single lawyer says does not make law or a regulation for that matter. It is an opinion only. Even so, if his lawyer has given such an opinion, it would be interesting to see it, as it should have been given in writing and not casually over the phone. He does not even name who his firm is, and frankly, if you have some eighth rate firm of solicitors operating out of a shoe box above a chip shop, I would not take their advice on something as serious as this. Only a firm with the proper competence should be trusted to make an assessment of Bitcoin, and until we see that such a firm has given its opinion on this, in writing, then its all worthless hearsay and gossip.

There is a huge amount of delusion, hysteria and cult mentality in the Bitcoin forum. They talk to themselves and whip themselves up into a frenzy about things that no one outside of their ‘community’ cares about. Whats worse, they design services and implement tools to comply with non existing legislation based only on this frenzied, navel gazing, nonsense. This interview is a perfect example of this mindset; the nauseating air of delusional self importance drips off of the screen.

 Source http://bitcoinmagazine.net/interview-with-glbses-nefario/

Nefario wont even tell the bitcoinglobal shareholders who the lawyer is or provide written proof and we are paying for the lawyer.

[EskimoBob]

I called to James today and we had a short chat about what is going on and what is the schedule for resolving this unpleasant happening for good.
In few words, he his clearing up the mess with double payments that happened. When this is sorted out, he will pay the rest of the BTC out and if this is done, he starts to work with issuers and account owners. He also told me he is going to stay as far away as possible from this forum. Not surprised at all.
He also promised to post a official statement in his GLBSE blog and list the his plan. 
 
Memvola ideas are on the right track (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1249735#msg1249735). Third party is needed to hash and verify the hashes of account-security-amount combinations so nobody is going to scream later, that he got less shares than he had.
This is not complicated stuff at all. Getting over the egos, emotions and absurd interpretations of made up laws by arm chair lawyers in tinfoil hats, is.

So, what is the exchange you can trust at the moment and if there is none, are you willing to take the step to the right direction and go for the OT? (install is not hard at all)

[MPOE-PR]

Right.

[Bitcoin Oz]

I called to James today and we had a short chat about what is going on and what is the schedule for resolving this unpleasant happening for good.
In few words, he his clearing up the mess with double payments that happened. When this is sorted out, he will pay the rest of the BTC out and if this is done, he starts to work with issuers and account owners. He also told me he is going to stay as far away as possible from this forum. Not surprised at all.
He also promised to post a official statement in his GLBSE blog and list the his plan. 
 
Memvola ideas are on the right track (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1249735#msg1249735). Third party is needed to hash and verify the hashes of account-security-amount combinations so nobody is going to scream later, that he got less shares than he had.
This is not complicated stuff at all. Getting over the egos, emotions and absurd interpretations of made up laws by arm chair lawyers in tinfoil hats, is.

So, what is the exchange you can trust at the moment and if there is none, are you willing to take the step to the right direction and go for the OT? (install is not hard at all)

You cant trust any exchange, thats the whole point. OT would be good when its easier to setup since you cn run it on your own server. It might be a good idea for someone to offer OT hosting services.

[markm]

You cant trust any exchange, thats the whole point. OT would be good when its easier to setup since you cn run it on your own server. It might be a good idea for someone to offer OT hosting services.

You almost seem to be contradicting yourself here.

If I host an OT server it is really my OT server not yours, if I let you know its private key then that is a security hole, because it is I not you who has actual access to the hardware thus you cannot stop me from looking at the private key whereas I can, and thus probably should, prevent you from seeing it.

I am providing OT hosting services: so far the OTdemo server. There is no need to deploy more until people have demonstrated on the OTdemo server that there is sufficient traffic to justify deploying more servers. If there is not even enough traffic for the demo server to pay for itself then obviously deploying more servers would not make any business-sense.

The OTdemo server permits any user to issue their own made-up assets, thus to demostrate that their assets attract traffic enough to justify the resources required to serve their assets.

If you simply get a machine at some third party location and put an OT server on it then there is diffusion of responsibility aka increased numbers of suspects in case of anything "going wrong" since you could find out the server's private key and the people who have physical custody of the machine also could discover the server's private key. So if you are a scammer looking to divert responsibility away from yourself I suppose you would love to make sure you have a whole hosting company's employees to point fingers at while actually having access also yourself thus being able to do something nefarious despite pretending to be using a "secure" server.

Basically a host cannot provide a "secure" server while allowing some third party, especially an asset issuer, access to the server's private key...

...What they would really be doing is providing an inherently insecure server, a server to which they have given some asset-issuer the key to the server.

The separation of responsibility in Open Transactions is an important part of how it all works. The fact that only the custodian of the physical machine running the server software has access to the private key of the server software is a key part of its security. It means everyone knows exactly who to blame. Scammers of course would love to be able to blame them, but it would be stupid of them to enable scammers by permitting scammers to know the private keys of the servers they host. Unless maybe they are scammers, and want to be able to blame you for their nefarious actions...

-MarkM-