[BitFunder] Asset Exchange Marketplace + Rewritable Options Trading

[Ukyo]

Just launched was BitFunder, a new exchange site for trading asset shares.
 
Shares of assets listed on BitFunder can be bought and sold using bitcoins, an online digital currency.
 
BitFunder is the first asset share exchange that both protects shareholder privacy while at the same
time provides a method for the shareholder to assert ownership.  This is accomplished by publishing a
live, public list of all shares and leverages the message-signing capability available through bitcoin.
 
BitFunder is easy-to-navigate and provides information in a clear manner.  BitFunder's highly responsive
support is available to answer any questions to resolve any problems that might occur.
 
Accounts can be protected from unauthorized access by enabling Google 2-Factor authentication.
 
The BitFunder sandbox at https://sandbox.bitfunder.com lets issuers and shareholders learn
how the site is used without putting any funds at risk.
 
Following the closure of the GLBSE asset exhange, BitFunder built a bridge to allow issuers to easily migrate.
GLBSE issuers can simply upload a claims YAML fle, and manage the claims provided.
When dividends are paid out, they are also distributed and stored on the claims so they are ready for users,
and accounting becomes easier on the issuer. Not to mention that all GLBSE assets that move to BitFunder
require no setup cost.

You can join us on IRC on irc.freenode.net #bitfunder
When you signup with BitFunder, we have IRC WebChat built into the help page.

Features:
Public shareholder data without giving away private information
Google 2-Factor
Bid List - "My Bid" notation to know where your bid stands.
Bid List - Cancel button for quick and easy cancel to re-post at a different price.
News system
Asset images
DDoS Proection
Interactive Graphs
Easy GLBSE Import/Claim system
Dividend management for GLBSE claims
Fully searchable trade history. (Search by date, asset, price, etc)
Dividend Reinvestment Program
Share Transfers

Coming Soon:
Trade API + Proper documentation ( Now in private beta testing phase. )
Direct Trades
User Messaging
Voting System
Additional Graphs *: Depth Graph is up. Crossing this out until someone has a new graph request.

[1714254473]

1714254473

[1714254473]

1714254473

[1714254473]

1714254473

[1714254473]

1714254473

[Graet]

I endorse this venture.
Good luck Jon
Graeme

[PsychoticBoy]

I relisted ABM at BitFunder, I am very pleased with the websites interface and transparency.

I wish Ukyo the best of luck with BitFunder, you got my full support 

Greetz,
PsychoticBoy

[Syloq]

This site is pretty awesome compared to others I've looked at. It has an easy and intuitive interface which makes buying and selling shares really easy.

I did like that the system is open such that all assets are publicly listed by Bitcoin address. The reason being that if BitFunder were to close the actual asset holders wouldn't have to wait 2+ months get a list which is something most of investors from GLBSE are dealing with currently.

Ukyo has been very responsive to questions about how it works and addresses any problems immediately. While the terms and conditions seem daunting, I don't see how it is different from any exchange that claims their assets are not real and immediately claiming they have no actual value.

I really can't wait for more assets to be listed on BitFunder. I'd suggest that all GLBSE asset "fugees" take a look at BitFunder's sandbox and see if it will work for them. Then immediately list their assets on the production site.

[Blaksmith]

Being fairly new to the Bitcoin share trading, but a little familiar with regular Forex trading, I thought I would give it a shot, and see how things work.

I'm very pleased with how the site works.  As with anything new, it takes a few runs around the site to know where everything is, but it does seem very easy to navigate.

After funding my account with a little bit of coin, I went and placed some orders, and since it was close to opening day, didn't think there would be much activity, and didn't think more of it for a few days.  Went in and checked today, and looking at the front page notes, that dividends were paid out YAY! 

On the transactions page, it is described in full detail which asset the dividend came from, quantity of shares, and amount per share.  Very nice having full descriptions of the activity!

On the Assets List page, all asset holdings listing looks complete with my total of shares for each Asset listing. 
Listed on the https://bitfunder.com/assetlist page of my BTC address of: 1BLAKSMTjnME4ZJX7VzzUyEgbQYLShvqgi


I'm going to enjoy doing some share trading on this site! 

Great job, and keep up the good work!

[JWU42]

Looks good!! 

Having followed Ukyo's work in some other projects and knowing Graet supports it makes me feel very good about the future prospects of this service!

[DrHaribo]

Cool to see this going public.

Good luck BitFunder!

[EskimoBob]

Looks nice and clean. Sandbox version did not let me do any trades but I guess this is OK at the moment. 

What happens when the three letter agencies are coming to knock on your door?
How are you different from https://btct.co or https://www.litecoinglobal.com ?

[Ukyo]

Thanks everyone for the kind words and support.

Quick update:
Graphs now show a "D"ividend market with payout information.

What happens when the three letter agencies are coming to knock on your door?
How are you different from https://btct.co or https://www.litecoinglobal.com ?

EskimoBob:

In my honest opinion, I do not believe that making a claim that the site is 'virtual currency' and that
'No assets on the site are to be considered real.' would convince any U.S. Federal Judge (esp. when
a U.S. Citizen goes out of their way to put it in a server in Belize when they operate their own hosting
service in the U.S) that the service is not guilty of something already and deny an FBI warrant request.
The U.S. Government does not care where your services are hosted, or how you claim ownership is
divided up, and especially if you are a U.S. citizen that appears to be in control (and sometimes if you
are real lucky, they do not even care if you are a U.S. Citizen to begin with), if they want to make an
example out of you they will. (see. KimDotCom)

If you get on the list of "Notorious Markets", it really does not matter where you are, who you are,
your citizenship, your servers location, or if you have a legitimate  business that has acted properly to
comply under all rules and regulations, if you are targeted, you will have to deal with it.

Here is the older December 20th, 2011 '"Notorious Markets" report from the office of the president of
the United States.
http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/3215

You will notice that many of these items state that they could be used for fully legal actions, but
include misuse, therefore on the list. Under "Cyberlockers" you will notice that "Megaupload" who
provided the same type of service as DropBox, and many other large named corporations is on that
list. I think most of us know the KimDotCom story. If you do not, a quick summery is, MegaUpload
was protected under the U.S. DMCA act, in which direct contact information is publicly available
for all to see, and is to be the direct point of contact for any persons claiming their site to be
hosting copyrighted materials. (I know, I am on the list due to my hosting business.) There had
been no actual complaints or suites filed against the company, and they had a working relationship
with the MPAA/RIAA for them to be able to remove any content they wanted at the click of a button.
Was the service illegal or not? The general answer is probably "legal", however, that is to be decided
after the site has been shut down, and fully investigated in this case. If it is not clearly legal (which
even those things get questioned), and is at worst case something that falls into a shade of grey that
is already being noticed by an entity, such as the SEC or FBI (who has published at least one report on
Bitcoin to my knowledge), then no matter what you do, or say, and try to be to protect yourself
the following applies.

A. It will never be enough to keep them from trying if you get targeted.
B. It will only make you look more guilty the more you try to "hide" things in other countries, etc.

If any entity targets you, the big question is what will happen to all of the users of the site and their data?
With the voluntary shutdown of GLBSE all data was retained, and is eventually being distributed. In the
previously mentioned worst case scenario, there would be no such luxury.

BitFunder has learned from this incident and has the users best interests in mind.
When a user signs up for BitFunder they are asked to provide a bitcoin address that will be listed publicly.
BitFunder publicly lists all data by coinaddress,asset,shares live on the site at all times without violating
any users privacy and allows them to proove ownership should the need arise.
You can view the public asset list at https://bitfunder.com/assetlist.

As of this point, re-checking their websites, and to the best of my knowledge, I can not find on either
btct.co or cryptostocks, a plan of action provided to the public that would stop such a terrifying loss
to the users and community, be it from "three letter agencies" to server and data failures, hackers, or
some other reason.

James (Nefario) was correct that the best course of action would be to become a legally supervised
entity. At least this somewhat lowers the chance.

I currently own and operate an AUD/CAD/USD exchange (https://WeExchange.co), and am
presently pursuing licensing in multiple countries & states for it. While in the process of this, I have
also been working out a method to potentially further legalize BitFunder in a respectable country.

I would hate to see this thread change to the subject of whats legal or not, options, etc.
If you want to continue the discussion I am more than happy to on another thread, or on IRC.

Again, this is only my opinion on the matter, which it may very well be wrong, but I allowed to have it.
I am always open to new ideas, concepts, etc and generally want to hear them.
(That is, after all the proper way to form an opinion of your own, not by shutting down others responses.)

Also, this opinion is not attempting to insult anyone in any way, if it has done so, I apologize ahead of time.

[EskimoBob]

Thank you for the answer.
I am looking for "home" where my ART project can move in and LTC exchange was one of the options. Your exchange sounds goo too. I guess I have to make up my mind soon and move forward. Looks like the dust is settling in GLBSE too and this is only good.
 

[burnside]

Thanks everyone for the kind words and support.

Quick update:
Graphs now show a "D"ividend market with payout information.

What happens when the three letter agencies are coming to knock on your door?
How are you different from https://btct.co or https://www.litecoinglobal.com ?

EskimoBob:

In my honest opinion, I do not believe that making a claim that the site is 'virtual currency' and that
'No assets on the site are to be considered real.' would convince any U.S. Federal Judge (esp. when
a U.S. Citizen goes out of their way to put it in a server in Belize when they operate their own hosting
service in the U.S) that the service is not guilty of something already and deny an FBI warrant request.
The U.S. Government does not care where your services are hosted, or how you claim ownership is
divided up, and especially if you are a U.S. citizen that appears to be in control (and sometimes if you
are real lucky, they do not even care if you are a U.S. Citizen to begin with), if they want to make an
example out of you they will. (see. KimDotCom)

If you get on the list of "Notorious Markets", it really does not matter where you are, who you are,
your citizenship, your servers location, or if you have a legitimate  business that has acted properly to
comply under all rules and regulations, if you are targeted, you will have to deal with it.

Here is the older December 20th, 2011 '"Notorious Markets" report from the office of the president of
the United States.
http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/3215

You will notice that many of these items state that they could be used for fully legal actions, but
include misuse, therefore on the list. Under "Cyberlockers" you will notice that "Megaupload" who
provided the same type of service as DropBox, and many other large named corporations is on that
list. I think most of us know the KimDotCom story. If you do not, a quick summery is, MegaUpload
was protected under the U.S. DMCA act, in which direct contact information is publicly available
for all to see, and is to be the direct point of contact for any persons claiming their site to be
hosting copyrighted materials. (I know, I am on the list due to my hosting business.) There had
been no actual complaints or suites filed against the company, and they had a working relationship
with the MPAA/RIAA for them to be able to remove any content they wanted at the click of a button.
Was the service illegal or not? The general answer is probably "legal", however, that is to be decided
after the site has been shut down, and fully investigated in this case. If it is not clearly legal (which
even those things get questioned), and is at worst case something that falls into a shade of grey that
is already being noticed by an entity, such as the SEC or FBI (who has published at least one report on
Bitcoin to my knowledge), then no matter what you do, or say, and try to be to protect yourself
the following applies.

A. It will never be enough to keep them from trying if you get targeted.
B. It will only make you look more guilty the more you try to "hide" things in other countries, etc.

If any entity targets you, the big question is what will happen to all of the users of the site and their data?
With the voluntary shutdown of GLBSE all data was retained, and is eventually being distributed. In the
previously mentioned worst case scenario, there would be no such luxury.

BitFunder has learned from this incident and has the users best interests in mind.
When a user signs up for BitFunder they are asked to provide a bitcoin address that will be listed publicly.
BitFunder publicly lists all data by coinaddress,asset,shares live on the site at all times without violating
any users privacy and allows them to proove ownership should the need arise.
You can view the public asset list at https://bitfunder.com/assetlist.

As of this point, re-checking their websites, and to the best of my knowledge, I can not find on either
btct.co or cryptostocks, a plan of action provided to the public that would stop such a terrifying loss
to the users and community, be it from "three letter agencies" to server and data failures, hackers, or
some other reason.

James (Nefario) was correct that the best course of action would be to become a legally supervised
entity. At least this somewhat lowers the chance.

I currently own and operate an AUD/CAD/USD exchange (https://WeExchange.co), and am
presently pursuing licensing in multiple countries & states for it. While in the process of this, I have
also been working out a method to potentially further legalize BitFunder in a respectable country.

I would hate to see this thread change to the subject of whats legal or not, options, etc.
If you want to continue the discussion I am more than happy to on another thread, or on IRC.

Again, this is only my opinion on the matter, which it may very well be wrong, but I allowed to have it.
I am always open to new ideas, concepts, etc and generally want to hear them.
(That is, after all the proper way to form an opinion of your own, not by shutting down others responses.)

Also, this opinion is not attempting to insult anyone in any way, if it has done so, I apologize ahead of time.

Good response Ukyo, I've been trying to avoid comparisons, as you never come out unbiased when describing your own projects.  However I'll try to clarify a few things.

It is incorrect that BTC Trading Corp is operated by a US Citizen.  It is operated by a group of gentlemen that reside in Belize from an office in Belize City.  While I hold a large stake in the company, my role is roughly that of a webmaster.  I do not have access to the corporate bank account for instance, and core site operations like asset approvals, etc, are handled by the shareholders.

You are correct that if the US Gov't wanted to disappear me, they could.  I doubt that anyone here could legitimately claim otherwise.  I would love to see the stockholders in the company diversified and I have publicly asked for candidates willing to register their shares (requires aml style id process) with the corporate secretary.

While in the process of this, I have
also been working out a method to potentially further legalize BitFunder in a respectable country.

Lawyer and I did a lot of research into this.  While not impossible, this would be an incredible feat until you have some significant revenue.  The problem is that most (every country I could find except for the Cook Islands) already have the equivalent of an SEC and require exchanges to be registered.  They're not going to approve you for trading in other than the local currencies, and will require your exchange to operate solely within their jurisdiction.  I would absolutely love it if you find somewhere out there that is a good home for legit BTC exchanges, but even if you did, it would still be illegal for that exchange to solicit US investors.  I know everyone likes to poke fun at it, but there's more legitimacy in the virtual exchange (educational and entertainment purposes only...) than you might think.  The very fact that everyone on the forums pokes fun at it legitimizes it because it's something I can hold up in court, "see your Honor, no one took it seriously, they all understood what it was."  Anyway, I digress. 

As of this point, re-checking their websites, and to the best of my knowledge, I can not find on either
btct.co or cryptostocks, a plan of action provided to the public that would stop such a terrifying loss
to the users and community, be it from "three letter agencies" to server and data failures, hackers, or
some other reason.

If any entity targets you, the big question is what will happen to all of the users of the site and their data?
With the voluntary shutdown of GLBSE all data was retained, and is eventually being distributed. In the
previously mentioned worst case scenario, there would be no such luxury.

Short answer.  It's in the FAQ... "Q: Why should we trust this site after so many others have failed?", and on the main page in the list of done todo's where each feature has been crossed off as it was developed.

Longer answer:  litecoinglobal.com had this from day... 1?  maybe 2?  (btct.co being a clone of litecoinglobal.com)  There are no less than 3 different ways the asset issuers can get at the data.  In the website.  Via JSON API.  And via email.  The email is automatic... you get a copy of all your shareholders in your inbox twice a day.  MPEx poked all kinds of fun at me for the email feature, but the bottom line is that I have no idea if anything will ever happen to the site and I don't want to be responsible for anyone's economic loss.  So it'd be easy to shift from one of BTC Trading Corp's exchanges to another exchange elsewhere because we've always been about making it easy for the asset issuers to do their thing.  This may eventually be to our detriment, as the issuers really could leave at any time, but I still feel strongly that it's important to give your users the tools they need to succeed.

Suggestion: You may want to re-examine your theory on BTC addresses being anonymous and maybe only display them to the asset issuers that need them.

Wrapping things up...

I can say, with all honesty that I am impressed with BitFunder and hope that you succeed.  It's a great looking site, easy to use, and seems to introduce some great new features.  I have a lot of respect for you and have no doubt that you'll be a great asset to the community.

Cheers.

[Ukyo]

It is incorrect that BTC Trading Corp is operated by a US Citizen.  It is operated by a group of gentlemen that reside in Belize from an office in Belize City.  While I hold a large stake in the company, my role is roughly that of a webmaster.  I do not have access to the corporate bank account for instance, and core site operations like asset approvals, etc, are handled by the shareholders.

I apologize, I was reading the "Organization and Management" section of the LTC-GLOBAL asset. It mentions "Currently LTC-GLOBAL is majority owned by burnside", with the domain is maintained under your services in the U.S., and under "Financial Management" where it states "All costs to date have come out of burnside's pocket.", it appears is you are the "Big Cheese"/"Head Honcho"/owner along with the people you are designating as "shareholders" that buy into the "Corporation"(not sure what type?) that is registered in Belize? You might seriously want to consider posting an 'About Us' page listing off the Belize corporation information, as well as listing the people behind the corporation, and official titles and responsibilities. Show the people that it is a real corporation, and it has to means to operate as one.
(Also, it is very common for many small~medium businesses to post pictures and full profiles of the people operating, and making the decisions in the company.)
As it stands from an outsiders point of view, it's all you bud. (And any "shareholders" a court decides to indict. ) (While I was kind of joking about that, it is still a serious consideration.) So seriously think on putting something up to help show show _everyone_ who might be interested, and how real of a corporation that it is.

Lawyer and I did a lot of research into this.  While not impossible, this would be an incredible feat until you have some significant revenue.  The problem is that most (every country I could find except for the Cook Islands) already have the equivalent of an SEC and require exchanges to be registered.  They're not going to approve you for trading in other than the local currencies, and will require your exchange to operate solely within their jurisdiction.  I would absolutely love it if you find somewhere out there that is a good home for legit BTC exchanges, but even if you did, it would still be illegal for that exchange to solicit US investors.  I know everyone likes to poke fun at it, but there's more legitimacy in the virtual exchange (educational and entertainment purposes only...) than you might think.  The very fact that everyone on the forums pokes fun at it legitimizes it because it's something I can hold up in court, "see your Honor, no one took it seriously, they all understood what it was."  Anyway, I digress. 

Oh yes, no one said it would be easy in any way shape or form. That's why no one has done it yet.
If you do not look, and press on, you never know.

As far as it being a joke, the moment you get into court, all laughs and games aside, the judge will ask you point blank, "If it's all 'virtual currency', fun and games, and exactly 'how' the users get this 'virtual currency' to trade it on your site since you do not sell it yourself. You could say "Users can 'mine' it using their already bought computers.", but I promise you within the first cross-examination, the DA will ask if "mining" uses additional electricity, and generally requires some investment of some sort, and could be traded out by many other central places for real currency, and if it has any sort of agreed value online or otherwise".

Putting that aside, you COULD argue that you are no different than a game company like World of Warcraft with your own 'virtual currency'. The problem is that unlike SecondLife, and many other's, you are not using your own 'virtual currency'. This is something you might want to consider doing with some simple fee-less third party exchanges, or possibly internally.

Although, I am curious what your lawyer thought about publicly trading "fake" shares of the "real" Belize corporation and treating those "fake" shares as "real" ones by giving out "real" dividends of "real" profits to those share holders as if they actually owned the "real" shares of the company, and how to deal with the Belize securities dept. if they come asking. (As you said, they won't be happy.) I do understand that you are claiming it is all fake, and has no value.. but I just don't see a judge agreeing with that in any way. "Yes your honor, none of our 'virtual shareholders' hold any real stock in our company. We just.. pay them out real profit worth of shares in that amount.. as if they actually owned them. It's all fun and games... for learning.. you see... ?" (Please, PLEASE tell me I missed something, because I feel bad now that I have considered and written this, and it is 5:10am. )

Short answer.  It's in the FAQ... "Q: Why should we trust this site after so many others have failed?", and on the main page in the list of done todo's where each feature has been crossed off as it was developed.

Longer answer:  litecoinglobal.com had this from day... 1?  maybe 2?  (btct.co being a clone of litecoinglobal.com)  There are no less than 3 different ways the asset issuers can get at the data.  In the website.  Via JSON API.  And via email.  The email is automatic... you get a copy of all your shareholders in your inbox twice a day.  MPEx poked all kinds of fun at me for the email feature, but the bottom line is that I have no idea if anything will ever happen to the site and I don't want to be responsible for anyone's economic loss.  So it'd be easy to shift from one of BTC Trading Corp's exchanges to another exchange elsewhere because we've always been about making it easy for the asset issuers to do their thing.  This may eventually be to our detriment, as the issuers really could leave at any time, but I still feel strongly that it's important to give your users the tools they need to succeed.

Ahhh, I apologize, I must have overlooked it or perhaps did not consider that the same. I think a lot of the problem is that many users do not trust the asset issuers when it comes down to money. Everyone has a scammer tag in their holster ready to quick draw the moment something even remotely smells funny, regardless of how well known, or reliable the issuer has been. We have already seen cases of people questioning issuers "where did XXX shares come from? Why do you have them? Do you have proof you owned them before YYY?" I guess in this respect, and the information not being out there for everyone to see, and not being 100% fully transparent just screams (to me, along with all the other voices in my head ) like it would still lead to many MANY more potential major incidents with a lot of "he said, she said".

Suggestion: You may want to re-examine your theory on BTC addresses being anonymous and maybe only display them to the asset issuers that need them.

Again, I try to make all my projects as transparent as possible. I am even looking to allow users to be able to use multiple addresses so they can split their holdings on the public list, however even that feels like it would be abused in some way. If you do not want people to know who you are, just create a new address that will only ever be used for an emergency claim. I just do not see a reason why everyone can not have a copy of the same data, and be on the same page as long as it maintains user privacy. As an exchange, we are responsible for maintaining a simple form of data that people have traded with their real money for. I can not stress enough to anyone how important that data is, and what a large responsibility exchanges have to insure data integrity up to the worst possible case scenarios. This also help's users feel assured that the exchange itself is not scamming the system. Many accusations of 'trusting' GLBSE's data flew pretty quick. With even just some holdings information withheld, for whatever reason, leaves an opportunity for people to worry that 'unclaimed' shares might be falsely listed under another person/s. Giving a list to asset owners is nice. Letting users click and see something that references what is theirs and knowing that other people are checking too and adding up the totals to see that the numbers balance out... to me, this is not some 'feature', but a sense of relief and confidence in the safety of their investment that the users deserve to have access to.
BitFunder aims to help protect everyone, issuers, and users alike in a fair and balanced fashion.

I can say, with all honesty that I am impressed with BitFunder and hope that you succeed.  It's a great looking site, easy to use, and seems to introduce some great new features.  I have a lot of respect for you and have no doubt that you'll be a great asset to the community.

I do also like your systems voting model, it is a very unique and interesting system.
(Just make sure no one confuses it with a "real" shareholders vote! )

[guruvan]

While I have faith in Ukyo's abilities, I have some concerns with the legal issues (sorry). Those, however, are less important (to me) than the lack of Ts&Cs.

I'd like to see those spelled out much more explicitly before I'd like to invest or raise funds. IMO, the Ts&Cs are relevant whether or not the service is intended to pay any attention to the standing legal authorities - contracts & agreements are made among people, and while we don't have means to enforce contracts other than public shame, they're still good to have.

Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

Oh. Also:
Sorry, that verification code is invalid.


A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK


lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time.

And...I have to kind a WeExchange account? hmm.

[Ukyo]

While I have faith in Ukyo's abilities, I have some concerns with the legal issues (sorry). Those, however, are less important (to me) than the lack of Ts&Cs.

I'd like to see those spelled out much more explicitly before I'd like to invest or raise funds. IMO, the Ts&Cs are relevant whether or not the service is intended to pay any attention to the standing legal authorities - contracts & agreements are made among people, and while we don't have means to enforce contracts other than public shame, they're still good to have.

I actually have been writing something up to go with it that better explains what to expect. I have just been trying to do enough research to make it as correct as possible. Also. no need to be sorry. That is the point of the thread. Everything counts when trying to make something better. I am far from perfect, and so is BitFunder. It does make a great goal though. I am all ears.

Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I actually have a litecoinglobal account, and not sure what you are talking about.. as far as converting LTC to some other thing... (other than shares?)
litecoinglobal uses LTC... btct uses BTC... Perhaps I misundestood something.

I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

This is a very true statement. Part of the reason for the previous amendment to the beta terms. I felt something extra needed to be there, as I still feel a more detailed and in depth version needs to be posted. And this kinda goes back to the first point of this reply.

Oh. Also:
Sorry, that verification code is invalid.

A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK

lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time.

Erm.. care to clarify?
I see the difference of an i vs. I...

[guruvan]

Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I actually have a litecoinglobal account, and not sure what you are talking about.. as far as converting LTC to some other thing... (other than shares?)
litecoinglobal uses LTC... btct uses BTC... Perhaps I misundestood something.

Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.
 

I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

This is a very true statement. Part of the reason for the previous amendment to the beta terms. I felt something extra needed to be there, as I still feel a more detailed and in depth version needs to be posted. And this kinda goes back to the first point of this reply.

Oh. Also:

Code:

Sorry, that verification code is invalid.

A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK

lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time.

Erm.. care to clarify?
I see the difference of an i vs. I...

Erm. This is how your site responded when I input the incorrect verification code. I didn't bother with a screenshot. The quoted text is what your site responded with when I input the incorrect verification code from email. To be clear, your site responded with the incorrect code I input, and the correct code

[burnside]

I didn't want to hijack your thread any more than I had already.  I replied here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=125629.msg1395696#msg1395696

Suggestion: You may want to re-examine your theory on BTC addresses being anonymous and maybe only display them to the asset issuers that need them.

Again, I try to make all my projects as transparent as possible. I am even looking to allow users to be able to use multiple addresses so they can split their holdings on the public list, however even that feels like it would be abused in some way. If you do not want people to know who you are, just create a new address that will only ever be used for an emergency claim. I just do not see a reason why everyone can not have a copy of the same data, and be on the same page as long as it maintains user privacy. As an exchange, we are responsible for maintaining a simple form of data that people have traded with their real money for. I can not stress enough to anyone how important that data is, and what a large responsibility exchanges have to insure data integrity up to the worst possible case scenarios. This also help's users feel assured that the exchange itself is not scamming the system. Many accusations of 'trusting' GLBSE's data flew pretty quick. With even just some holdings information withheld, for whatever reason, leaves an opportunity for people to worry that 'unclaimed' shares might be falsely listed under another person/s. Giving a list to asset owners is nice. Letting users click and see something that references what is theirs and knowing that other people are checking too and adding up the totals to see that the numbers balance out... to me, this is not some 'feature', but a sense of relief and confidence in the safety of their investment that the users deserve to have access to.
BitFunder aims to help protect everyone, issuers, and users alike in a fair and balanced fashion.

I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up? 

Cheers.

[Ukyo]

I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up? 

That is why I said you would just create an extra address to use just for the public list.
With bitcoin wallets, you can have multiple addresses and use them for different things.
If you want the info to stay private, create a new address (that has no history), and use that.

[burnside]

I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up? 

That is why I said you would just create an extra address to use just for the public list.
With bitcoin wallets, you can have multiple addresses and use them for different things.
If you want the info to stay private, create a new address (that has no history), and use that.

Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.

[Ukyo]

Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.

Great question! This gives me an excellent chance to clarify for anyone else who does not get it.

If a person was wanting to hide their identity, they simple generate a new address.
As long as they use this address for the public list, and do not receive or send any bitcoins from this address, it has NO history.

Should a user need to use this (and I sure hope it never happens.) then there are a multitude of ways to provide proof.

1. The user can send a micro transaction of BTC to the issuer, who could return it. (They then have proof of who controls that address.)
(One of the easiest methods to understand.)
2. The user can 'sign' an arbitrary message with their bitcoin address to show proof of control.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3337/what-are-the-safety-guidelines-for-using-the-sign-message-feature/3339#3339

These two methods alone should be more than enough to be able to show identification.

[Ukyo]

Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.

Err.. I am looking at the page right now.. I see things like 'Withdrawal fee of just 0.1 LTC'... when I search the page for 'LITS', chrome gives me 2 results, both in the same line.
"Security Page: Support for splits and reverse splits. (thx osoverflow)"  splits & splits... and no finds for the word convert.

Looking at the main page for btct... again, it is the same... Perhaps Burnside can clarify this a bit more?
It might have been something they decided to remove.
 

Erm. This is how your site responded when I input the incorrect verification code. I didn't bother with a screenshot. The quoted text is what your site responded with when I input the incorrect verification code from email. To be clear, your site responded with the incorrect code I input, and the correct code

The message would have only been displayed to those who's code matched in a lowercase comparison, and only if a code had been generated for the email address within the last 5 minutes for obvious security reasons.

Thanks for that! The issue has been taken care of.

In the future, should you see any problems feel free to use the ticket system that will get someone's attention upon submission.