IOHK Research and Scorex ARE NOT working with Waves

[Come-from-Beyond]

You over-complicate things, It all boils down to this - 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.

TPTB trolls everyone with this his idée fixe. Better ignore his posts on this issue, sane counterarguments will just make him angry.

[1713989630]

1713989630

[1713989630]

1713989630

[smooth]

kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).

First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).

To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.

Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------

Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests. 

Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.

I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

[traumschiff]

kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).

First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).

To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.

Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------

Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests.  

Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.

I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

His statement seems to imply this case, but what you are asking for him to do is the very thing he seems to want to avoid (and we don't know why, but probably some legal issues with IOHK). Not sure if the question makes sense.

[TPTB_need_war]

kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).

First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).

To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.

Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------

Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests.  

Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.

I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

His statement seems to imply this case, but what you are asking for him to do is the very thing he seems to want to avoid (and we don't know why, but probably some legal issues with IOHK). Not sure if the question makes sense.

My (wild guess) opinion/speculation follows. I can read between the lines too, as many of you probably did also. Kushti is friends with Sasha. Kushti is a Russian who isn't hung up on formalities of laws we have in the West and is primarily interested in developing the code and having enough money to afford better lighting in his dingy apartment (this is a joke for anyone who has seen the Waves Hangout video). I guesstimate that Kushti doesn't have an ethical stance against ICOs and he probably thinks it was all just hunkydory. But then Charles probably explained that this is unacceptable for the company and for Charles personally being a USA citizen. So Kushti appears to be trying to ride the middle line.

The problem here appears to be incompatible cultures. We appear to have different attitude in the West towards issues revolving around intellectual property, contracts, and investment laws. Charles hails from academia or math research, and he wants to form diverse and global ties. I am thinking he is bumping up against the sort of quagmires that can arise in international business.

My stance is that Sasha needs to realize that if he wants to integrate with our hitech world in the West, then he needs to play ball within our more formal legal structures. I actually hate red tape and lawyering up. I love production and coding. So it is strange to see me taking this stance. I guess I have become very pragmatic at age 51. Alas I am not 20s and 30s carefree now. By not being careful, I encountered some big mistakes in my life. I am much more cautious.

[Come-from-Beyond]

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.

[sasha35625]

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

[smooth]

kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).

First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).

To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.

Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------

Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests.  

Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.

I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

His statement seems to imply this case, but what you are asking for him to do is the very thing he seems to want to avoid (and we don't know why, but probably some legal issues with IOHK). Not sure if the question makes sense.

The question certainly makes sense. I'll be happy to clarify it for him should he request that I do so. Until then I will await his answers and ignore third party speculation as to his answers.

[traumschiff]

kushti is here (writing from a some place in Russia, yes).

First, some historical points. Scorex was started in Nov, 2014 as kinda funny project. To that moment, I spent few months working for Nxt. As you may know, Nxt prevents forking with closing code not released into production yet and also by somewhat terrible licensing(since 1.5?). Anyway, it has a lot of forks, and some of them with very interesting ideas (e.g. BURST).

To have thing open to the extreme I've published Scorex under CC0(Public Domain) license, so everyone can do literally anything with the code.

Since last autumn development of Scorex is subsidized by IOHK, and since Feb I'm a Research Fellow and Scorex project director in IOHK Research.
-------

Well, Scorex(as well as papers publicly published) could be used in any project. That surely does not mean collaboration with IOHK. However, we would like to get issues on core functionality to be reported to resolve and also (and especially) pull requests.  

Me & Sasha, Charles & Sasha, and three of us had some conversations after Sasha's decision to build Waves on top of Scorex. No any collaboration has been established to the moment as a result. And that is surely up to Charles.

I do not endorse neither oppose Waves ICO. I do not have much technical details, and I'm not competent in other topics.

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

His statement seems to imply this case, but what you are asking for him to do is the very thing he seems to want to avoid (and we don't know why, but probably some legal issues with IOHK). Not sure if the question makes sense.

My (wild guess) opinion/speculation follows. I can read between the lines too, as many of you probably did also. Kushti is friends with Sasha. Kushti is a Russian who isn't hung up on formalities of laws we have in the West and is primarily interested in developing the code and having enough money to afford better lighting in his dingy apartment (this is a joke for anyone who has seen the Waves Hangout video). I guesstimate that Kushti doesn't have an ethical stance against ICOs and he probably thinks it was all just hunkydory. But then Charles probably explained that this is unacceptable for the company and for Charles personally being a USA citizen. So Kushti appears to be trying to ride the middle line.

The problem here appears to be incompatible cultures. We appear to have different attitude in the West towards issues revolving around intellectual property, contracts, and investment laws. Charles hails from academia or math research, and he wants to form diverse and global ties. I am thinking he is bumping up against the sort of quagmires that can arise in international business.

My stance is that Sasha needs to realize that if he wants to integrate with our hitech world in the West, then he needs to play ball within our more formal legal structures. I actually hate red tape and lawyering up. I love production and coding. So it is strange to see me taking this stance. I guess I have become very pragmatic at age 51. Alas I am not 20s and 30s carefree now. By not being careful, I encountered some big mistakes in my life. I am much more cautious.

I agree with your speculation in the first part, but I partly disagree with the conclusion which is bolded. They are building something that doesn't have to rely on US laws or financial institutes, but if you want complete mainstream adoption it obviously is helpful.

In this case it seems possible that the end-product can be marketed to banks or finance businesses even if the kickstarter part was funded by a non-(US)compliant funding. Can still pass as a grey area.

[From Above]

@kushti Did you ever have any formal or informal agreement to serve as an advisor or in any other role on the Waves team, either individually, as a Nxt developer, or as an employee of IOHK? (The latter seems clear from previous posts but best to clarify.)

If not, did you engage in any communications with the Waves team or founders which could reasonably have led them to believe you would serve in such a role?

looks like the Munero alt-coin police has arrived in dem thread to CLEAR THINGS UP HERE.

WATCH OUT


~CfA~

[smooth]

In this case it seems possible that the end-product can be marketed to banks or finance business even if the kickstarter part was funded by a non-(US)compliant funding. Can still pass as a grey area.

I agree with you that it is possible, but it would require that the platform be extremely compelling. Only in that instance will banks and other conservative, often heavily-regulated business touch anything in a gray area. We've seen how they have been very reluctant to get involved with Bitcoin, for example. It hasn't prevented a few trailblazers from venturing into that gray area, but only once Bitcoin reached a relatively enormous size and impact (relative to the apparent prospects of new crypto projects, not relative to conventional finance).

[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.

Edit: I recall one of my female classmates at the university was Russian. I believe she using me to help her improve her grade by studying along with me, knowing that I was attracted to her. I had forgotten about that.

[sasha35625]

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.

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.

I can post a huge rant here later, addressing your ideas, it's just it would be off-topic.  I apologized to Charles, would be cool to see some reaction from him too.

[TPTB_need_war]

I can post a huge rant here later, addressing your ideas, it's just it would be off-topic.

I posted a copy in the thread for discussing securities law as it pertains to crypto-currency tokens, so if you prefer to reply there:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14548126#msg14548126

I am interested to read your explanation.

[Netnox]

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.

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.

I can post a huge rant here later, addressing your ideas, it's just it would be off-topic.  I apologized to Charles, would be cool to see some reaction from him too.

Nice gesture, Charles could show the same now.

[TPTB_need_war]

In this case it seems possible that the end-product can be marketed to banks or finance business even if the kickstarter part was funded by a non-(US)compliant funding. Can still pass as a grey area.

I agree with you that it is possible, but it would require that the platform be extremely compelling. Only in that instance will banks and other conservative, often heavily-regulated business touch anything in a gray area. We've seen how they have been very reluctant to get involved with Bitcoin, for example. It hasn't prevented a few trailblazers from venturing into that gray area, but only once Bitcoin reached a relatively enormous size and impact (relative to the apparent prospects of new crypto projects, not relative to conventional finance).

And even if that is the outcome, the banks don't need the tokens and its questionable history. They need only the open source code and the developers who know how to code on it. So again the developers and insiders get everything and the foolish n00b token investors get an empty bag.

[charleshoskinson]

There is no gesture to show. One of my employees was listed on the Waves website and represented as a Waves employee. Marketers responsible for pumping waves where posting IOHK whitepapers on the ethereum reddit.

I posted a clarification and then members of the Waves marketing team decided to post links about me leaving ethereum, the head of waves lied about Alex continuing to consult with Waves (he will not continue if he ever did to begin with) and then called me delusional.

As far as I'm concerned this is a closed matter. We have clarified our position and Waves has clarified theirs. If they decide to represent my employees as members of their team in the future, then we will take legal action. I'm sure that won't happen. I wish the project luck and for the sake of the investors hope it all works out

[yassin54]

You over-complicate things, It all boils down to this - 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.

TPTB trolls everyone with this his idée fixe. Better ignore his posts on this issue, sane counterarguments will just make him angry.

yes, he is everywhere this man!!  

[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.

[sasha35625]

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

[TPTB_need_war]

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.