The altcoin topic everyone wants to sweep under the rug

[Come-from-Beyond]

Their (ICO promotion) signatures always reveal their hatred for the truth I speak about selling ostensibly illegal unregistered investment securities to US investors.

Suppose they don't like that truth. How sad they wouldn't be able to steal money if they obeyed the law. 

The laws you refer to were created to protect interests of banksters, not of ordinary people. We all are 18+ here and decide ourselves what to do with our money. Go and post on Wall Street forums, people like you (who want to be a submissive of USA govt) are not welcome here.

PS: Could anyone quote my post, please? The guy doesn't like when I disturb him in his delusion world, but the message is intended to open his eyes and bring him back to the reality, it's important for him (though he won't admit that even to himself).

[TPTB_need_war]

Just curious, and not looking to get into a long-running discussion over this, but if Waves is domiciled in Europe somewhere isn't it really the responsibility of US investors to obey US laws, not some foreign organization?

IANAL, but apparently US law goes after the issuers if they market them to non-accredited US investors. There may be details and exceptions. There is an entire thread on this topic.

Secondly, they are selling tokens, not shares in a corporation. How is what they're doing different then selling any other token (postage stamps, old coins) or commodity that goes up and down in value?

That linked thread explains the Supreme Court Howey test. Key criteria is the n00b (non-accredited) investors are relying on the future actions of issuer for the expectations of profits.

[TPTB_need_war]

Seriously though, is there any reason for me to invest in Dash, given the evidence? (genuine question)

Because it might go up in value?

If you are looking for long term success, no, there is not really a basis to expect that, and the disreputable background documented here only makes that less likely.

If you are looking for short term swings, sure, go for it if your research supports it and you can afford the risk.

Be careful if you are playing big though. The liquidity in Dash is quite poor, both relative to the market cap and in absolute terms. Most likely because the vast majority of the coin supply doesn't ever hit the market, it is HODLed by instaminers and early adopters who have it locked up in masternodes.

For small-size trading where you try to time the market and don't need to worry much about liquidity, it can be as good as anything else.

And also given the level of insider control alleged, we don't know if the Dash liquidity is faked. So actual liquidity may be even worse than advertised.

Every day you have hanging over your investment the extra risk that FinCEN, State of Arizona, or the SEC could announce an investigation.

[TPTB_need_war]

I was thinking synereo was possibly meant

Same answer though. I don't even really know what that is, beyond some vague thing about social media. No idea how it was launched, what it does, etc. Never looked at it.

A competing social network for maskcoin or jambox or w/e hes calling it now. Hes trying to imply that you and Shelby intentionally gang on together on things maybe?

I dont know, but it seems like you broke the fella so i guess we probably wont know

I've read most of the 50+ page Synereo white paper, expended several hours viewing some of their YouTube Hangouts, done some limited discussion with their founding developer (username here Elokane), and posted in every recent Synereo thread in Altcoin Discussion.

Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).

I have pointed out that there are numerous P2P (aka distributed) social networking projects, so the idea of Synereo being the first and able to sweep the world, is very slim, especially they have no compelling features afaics. Thus I have criticized them for preselling tokens ("AMPS") with no adoption and on hype. Their major claim as an innovative feature is an "Attention Model" which is composed of reputation ("Reo") and a counter-vailing force of being able to pay to override reputation with the AMPS tokens. In other words, they aim to make the content that the users share more relevant. I had pointed out that the Reo needs to be fine-grained on for example #hashtags, and Elokane indicated that although that is not in the white paper they are implementing something like that, yet there is no holistic public specification afaik. They are claiming to be very close to beta, but I've pointed out that doesn't mean they are any where near adoption. I have also pointed out that Facebook users don't seem to have major complaints about the relevance of shared content on feeds, thus I doubt anyone will adopt Synereo (because their friends won't be there and much less content sharing and other chicken and egg dilemmas).

Also I have pointed out that the economics of advertising is the most someone could expect to earn by being paid to share (the AMPs model) is perhaps about $1 (in developing world) to $10 (first-world) per day and probably not that much. It simply isn't worth anyone's time. People don't join social networks to be paid some palty income. They join for other more important reasons. Thus I've argued the economic model for the AMPS is fundamentally flawed.

Thus I have argued they are preselling shit which no market.

Also I don't really understand the process calculus well enough to know if it is technobabble bullshit or not, but it sure looks like it to me. It looks like ivory tower shit that has no real implications in the real world. What did BizTalk do that was relevant? I did a Google search and it seems basically no one used it? Excuse me for being skeptical but the selling of ICOs is becoming too lucrative and attractive for every Joe who has some technobabble to make n00bs drool.

Smooth is not involved in my JAMBOX project at all. I occasionally trade ideas with him about technology. My JAMBOX project will when it is crowdsourced (not for tokens just for Tshirts!) will explain that it targets compelling features and economics. I have not yet announced that, because for one thing is that at the moment I am working on potentially creating a new programming language based on top of Rust, or perhaps contributing to Rust. Because JAMBOX is based on the concept of empowering mobile apps, and so I need to be sure the language we are using is the best in severals ways one of which is JIT compilation.

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.

[TPTB_need_war]

Until I receive a formal apology from sasha in this thread for calling me delusional and then telling people to Google my history to see how I'm a "bad actor", there is no possibility of collaboration.

My company and its partners will not work with projects or people who personally attack our personnel or management.

Charles I did this because I couldn't really understand your behavior and what you actually wanted. It was in the heat of the moment and I apologize for this.  I have to mention that I know Alex from NXT community since at least a couple years, we've met at a conference, I've been following Scorex and his articles closely at least since October or November last year. It was a very obvious choice for me to build on scorex, since I liked the approach and it would obviously speed up the development. Of course Scorex is not production-ready but no one was going to put it into production immediately.

I know Alex as a member of NXT community and NXT developer, not as an IOHK employee. I can somehow understand your position now but you should also understand mine. Crypto is about cooperation, and I really expect people to cooperate, especially when they seem interested, like you did. So these developments were unexpected for me,  and I made these remarks.   This situation does not do any good to either party.  Please let's finish this and move on to building products.

Actions speak louder than words. Have you removed the misleading statements from your website and inserted a disclaimer that your interactions on the open source Scorex do not constitute an endorsement, commitment, nor assistance from IOHK?

I think you don't understand well the predicament Charles is in, considering that he is running a global corporation and is ostensibly a USA citizen. He can't at any costs be later claimed to have contributed to the promotion of illegal investment securities to non-accredited USA investors (and regulatory issues in other jurisdictions). Although he won't come right out and say this, you need to respect and understand that this issue is most definitely lurking (unless Charles specifically states here that is not an issue for him). He is being diplomatic but it is up to you to have a brain and read between the lines so there won't be a misunderstanding. This is not a small matter. Jail time is potentially involved.

Disclaimer: IANAL so consult your own. And I have had no discussions with Charles on this matter, nor on legal issues, nor any private communication with Charles since 2014 (before he formed Ethereum) afair.

[noobtrader]

 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

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

[noobtrader]

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.

OMG... the answer resemble exactly the title of this thread  sweep under the rug that monero has infinite supply

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/3z527f/does_monero_have_a_maximum_cap_like_bitcoin_21/

[–]Ant-n 8 points 3 months ago
Monero is a bit different that bitcoin about money supply.
Once the total number of moneroj will reach 18.3 million then money supply will stop decreasing and stay at a constant rate of 0.3 Monero per minute.
This is meant to provide incentive to secure the blockchain even after the 18.3 million coins will be distributed.
Note that it's a constant amount so it will be about 1% the first year and it will reduce every year but never reach 0.
permalink

[TPTB_need_war]

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

[smooth]

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

Yes and you can verify it was always there in archive.org. Off topic here, please continue on a Monero thread if you have other questions.

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

[Macno]

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.
As for "scaring people etc": that`s what YOU keep doing by alleging "scam" and SEC prosecution all over the place.
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!

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

[Macno]

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.
As for "scaring people etc": that`s what YOU keep doing by alleging "scam" and SEC prosecution all over the place.
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!

He won't, because he can't, our little friend here can't afford an interaction with said agencies..........

But between you and I, let's let him continue to the be the BIG MAN on bitcointalk.

He is at least our little muse, a DASH court jester if you will.  

Well, in that case he was kindly protecting me from another alleged scam (Synereo/AMP), but yes, he is also protecting me in the DASH case.
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.

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

[TPTB_need_war]

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=999886.0

smooth 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.

[Macno]

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.

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.

I just want you to be consistent and go the authorities if you think you are witnessing such tremendous crimes.
In my (german) society there is the concept of "unterlassene Hilfeleistung" which google translates as  "failure to render assistance", which is a crime in itself where I come from. To me you are guilty of either that or of hypocrisy.

[TPTB_need_war]

I just want you to be consistent and go the authorities if you think you are witnessing such tremendous crimes.
In my (german) society there is the concept of "unterlassene Hilfeleistung" which google translates as  "failure to render assistance", which is a crime in itself where I come from. To me you are guilty of either that or of hypocrisy.

I am rendering assistance with all my research here.

You have no right to compel me to force the SEC to do something, which I don't have the power to force them to do. That is entirely disingenuous. You are playing a game here. Re-read my prior post; I added another example of your disingenuous tactics.

In german law there is the concept of "unterlassene Hilfeleistung", "failure to render assistance".  You areI am culpable of not doing everything in yourmy power to save those poor new investors, which makes youme a culprit/co-conspirator as well. Up to 5 years in prison in Germany, don`t take that lightly ("Nichtanzeige geplanter Straftaten"; § 138 of german penal law).

ftfy

I don't live in Germany. We have no such law in the USA. Do you enjoy incriminating yourself.

In german law there is the concept of "unterlassene Hilfeleistung", "failure to render assistance".  You areI am culpable of not doing everything in yourmy power to save those poor new investors, which makes youme a culprit/co-conspirator as well. Up to 5 years in prison in Germany, don`t take that lightly ("Nichtanzeige geplanter Straftaten"; § 138 of german penal law).

ftfy

I don't live in Germany. We have no such law in the USA. Do you enjoy incriminating yourself.

Poor USA. How can the "society" turn a blind eye on the vicious people witnessing severe crimes without helping?
I can`t see the crimes, so I have no reason to go to the police and I am confident that a judge would believe me.
But you and smooth are sooooooooooooooooooooooooo sure about ongoing crimes you are witnessing for 2 years and you STILL do nothing to stop it. GO. TO. THE. POLICE. Fast.

Quoted for your government's future investigations. In addition to your boastful defiance of USA law and I suspect international treaties of the G20 to mutually enforce each other's laws, you may have an even bigger problem. Apparently you may be promoting and condoning what may be illegal actions under German securities law:

http://uk.practicallaw.com/1-501-2097#a165703 (pay attention to the "open market" case)
http://uk.practicallaw.com/1-501-2097#a376738

[TPTB_need_war]

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.

Where is the "value transfer system"? I see only tokens sold to speculators hoping to make a profit on the rise in exchange price on a few centralized exchanges populated only by speculators. Afaik, the Waves product isn't even ready to ship to actual users of a "value transfer system", how could it be a value transfer system.

The tokens were not distributed for use as a currency. There is no significant use of the tokens for exchanging value for any purpose other than speculation on the price of the tokens.

One way to make it even less dubious, is don't sell the tokens to the adopters of the "value transfer system" so that they don't need to be speculators to justify obtaining the tokens.

You're a troll and you know it

How so?

Hey I am genuinely trying to launch a "value transfer system". So I think I know the difference between selling tokens versus creating a "value transfer system". What is your rationalization that what you are pre-selling is primarily a currency and not a primarily a speculation  

I mean come on, just give me one reasonable argument. Isn't it obvious that you are no where near having a currency, but do have many pumpers running around this forum with a Waves banner on their signature.

You can sell an ICO legally I presume. One thing you could have done is get a lawyer and have him advise, e.g. blacklisting USA non-accredited investors.

[TPTB_need_war]

wait a sec shelby. shouldnt this be the job of the US non-accredited investors to decide what they can or cant do.

Originally I supported this perspective, which also seems to be supported by the actual history of the blueksky laws in the USA:

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2679&context=fss_papers

What changed my mind is the altcoin arena has turned totally away from any sane decentralized designs to the proof-of-shit/stake designs which are really just MLM investment scams in disguise that prey on the gambling instinct in humans.

It is regressing the progress of our technologies, not advancing them.


More abstractly, you are essentially arguing that every member of society is an island and can protect him/herself from every threat alone.

Shouldn't it be the job of every citizen of a nation to defend themselves against a nuclear bomb using their handgun.

The reason the USA protects the little man from his own gambling instinct is because it is known to be an impoverishing addiction that leads to deleterious outcomes for society. Whether it didn't entirely come about for that reason, the public seems to support the regulation of gambling.

My more abstract generative essence statement on regulation is as follows. Any market which is not self-regulating, i.e. which is dysfunctional and not behaving as a free market, will end up regulated by special interests. My definition of "free market" is decentralized market. So the reason the altcoin market is not decentralized and is dysfunctional, is because of asymmetric information. The speculators entirely lack the ability to understand the technobabble. They entirely rely on a few "experts" to guide them. And thus the market does not function. It regresses.

You need a Nash equilibrium for security aspects, but you also need one for adoption.  If someone premines the entire coin and has the market cornered by design on day one, there's zero incentive for anyone to adopt it when the issuer and his cronies have such advantage over everyone else.  You're just replicating central banking except the value of central banking units is derived through coercion, and without it, it would have no value.

Which is precisely why it can't become a "value transfer system" where that is supposed to mean a currency and unit-of-exchange, and not a transfer of value from gamblers and fools to snakeoiltechnocoolbabble salesmen.