[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]

[Puppet]

Yes but SEC stepping in means that they would have to convince somebody to do something. As in Hong Kong officials. And I really think they might not care enough.

Where do you think bitfunder is incorporated? Where was BTCST? Hint: not in the US.
Why dont you be the hero, start an exchange, and if you get a cease and desist letter from a foreign exchange commission, just ignore it, see what happens.

[Puppet]

I wonder if Ken considered the option of hiring somebody to run direct shares. It may have to be a very real consideration. Didn't this same thing happen to btct just a month back or so? and then comes the notice that they'll have to close permanently...

A while back Ken wrote they already had the code for a private exchange, precisely for this reason. I commended him for that, being forward looking (and was ridiculed by many for saying that). Its in this thread. Anyway, e that doesnt change the legal status, selling those shares directly wouldnt be any more legal, unless he registers them first. He might not attract as much attention, but its hardly a fundamental solution.

[Puppet]

No other country in the world is oppressing its citizens like the SEC and I will eat my hat if any non-US agency sends bitfunder a cease and desist instruction.

You think that? Read up on the Australian equivalent (ASIC) and start googling for a good recipe for that hat.

[superduh]

ActM is incredibly cheap 80% last IPO round price

[shrodes]

A while back Ken wrote they already had the code for a private exchange, precisely for this reason. I commended him for that, being forward looking (and was ridiculed by many for saying that). Its in this thread. Anyway, e that doesnt change the legal status, selling those shares directly wouldnt be any more legal, unless he registers them first. He might not attract as much attention, but its hardly a fundamental solution.

Well after the whole drama with the website design, I'm not overly optimistic about the design of a complex trading system probably created by whoever made the current ActM website.

I think the best option would be to go direct shares (though it makes liquidating shares more difficult), and hire someone to manage this if required.

[kleeck]

A while back Ken wrote they already had the code for a private exchange, precisely for this reason. I commended him for that, being forward looking (and was ridiculed by many for saying that). Its in this thread. Anyway, e that doesnt change the legal status, selling those shares directly wouldnt be any more legal, unless he registers them first. He might not attract as much attention, but its hardly a fundamental solution.

Well after the whole drama with the website design, I'm not overly optimistic about the design of a complex trading system probably created by whoever made the current ActM website.

I think the best option would be to go direct shares (though it makes liquidating shares more difficult), and hire someone to manage this if required.

You've seen this, right? http://mpex.co/

LOL. I think we can at least hit a slightly higher mark than that.

[zefyr0s]

I wonder if Ken considered the option of hiring somebody to run direct shares. It may have to be a very real consideration. Didn't this same thing happen to btct just a month back or so? and then comes the notice that they'll have to close permanently...

A while back Ken wrote they already had the code for a private exchange, precisely for this reason. I commended him for that, being forward looking (and was ridiculed by many for saying that). Its in this thread. Anyway, e that doesnt change the legal status, selling those shares directly wouldnt be any more legal, unless he registers them first. He might not attract as much attention, but its hardly a fundamental solution.

Aye, that's why I didn't mention it as it would likely face the similar situation as btct and now bitfunder are running into. Colored coins is the best way I think, especially if more governments come to the realization that they won't be able to restrict something that exists within the bitcoin protocol itself. I see the problem with direct shares, but I mean the further we keep getting pushed back here, the more its going to seem like downright oppression. You could make the same argument for using colored coins and say that you're still trading unregistered shares, no matter that you use the term 'colored coins'. They have to realize at some point that its going to be much easier for them to just try and adapt to the changing landscape instead of yanking it backwards so they can have it the way it should be.

[Puppet]

Aye, that's why I didn't mention it as it would likely face the similar situation as btct and now bitfunder are running into. Colored coins is the best way I think, especially if more governments come to the realization that they won't be able to restrict something that exists within the bitcoin protocol itself. I see the problem with direct shares, but I mean the further we keep getting pushed back here, the more its going to seem like downright oppression. You could make the same argument for using colored coins and say that you're still trading unregistered shares, no matter that you use the term 'colored coins'. They have to realize at some point that its going to be much easier for them to just try and adapt to the changing landscape instead of yanking it backwards so they can have it the way it should be.

Maybe so. OTOH, I dont think there is much harm in adhering to existing laws either. Registering a security isnt that hard, and the disclosures it requires can only be considered a good thing for potential investors. Even if these laws wouldnt apply, most of what they dictate should be common sense, and would avoid 99% of all pirate, labcoin and similar scams. Is that really worth fighting against?

The only annoying thing is that you'd have to register those securities in just about any country, it would be nice if there was some central "internet security and exchange commission".

[kslaughter]

Aye, that's why I didn't mention it as it would likely face the similar situation as btct and now bitfunder are running into. Colored coins is the best way I think, especially if more governments come to the realization that they won't be able to restrict something that exists within the bitcoin protocol itself. I see the problem with direct shares, but I mean the further we keep getting pushed back here, the more its going to seem like downright oppression. You could make the same argument for using colored coins and say that you're still trading unregistered shares, no matter that you use the term 'colored coins'. They have to realize at some point that its going to be much easier for them to just try and adapt to the changing landscape instead of yanking it backwards so they can have it the way it should be.

Maybe so. OTOH, I dont think there is much harm in adhering to existing laws either. Registering a security isnt that hard, and the disclosures it requires can only be considered a good thing for potential investors. Even if these laws wouldnt apply, most of what they dictate should be common sense, and would avoid 99% of all pirate, labcoin and similar scams. Is that really worth fighting against?

The only annoying thing is that you'd have to register those securities in just about any country, it would be nice if there was some central "internet security and exchange commission".

This is the problem, you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

[chsados]

This is just sad.

I put a good amount of an investment into activemining - knowing it was going to be a very long term investment.  now it looks like we will have to sell at a massive loss just to move shares to yet another exchange that hopefully will allow activemining to list (and not potentially close down sometime in the future).

Color Coins - where are you!

[Sou]

@kslaughter what would you advice your shareholders to do at this point? Both US citizens and others.

[redbeans2012]

This is just sad.

I put a good amount of an investment into activemining - knowing it was going to be a very long term investment.  now it looks like we will have to sell at a massive loss just to move shares to yet another exchange that hopefully will allow activemining to list (and not potentially close down sometime in the future).

Color Coins - where are you!

Are we forced to liquidate our shares or not, answer this ken?

[bitmoon]

i am interested what happened to the guy, who paid ken to transfer from BF to btct.

i assume he is back to BF, with a big loss, and more if he is US citizen.

i feel sad for him

[knybe]

i am interested what happened to the guy, who paid ken to transfer from BF to btct.

i assume he is back to BF, with a big loss, and more if he is US citizen.

i feel sad for him

ancient history.
it was VolcanicEruptor and trust me, there's no need to feel sad for him.

[zefyr0s]

Are we forced to liquidate our shares or not, answer this ken?

No. Why would you think that? Activemining isn't going to disappear because the exchanges are being shut down. Investors are still investors. Can't profit off of someone else's money by stealing. Only by borrowing.

[knybe]

Ken have you considered this?

click: Colored Coins

[kslaughter]

Ken have you considered this?

click: Colored Coins

Yes, I have looked into it somewhat, I might be looking into it some more soon.

[Sou]

Ken have you considered this?

click: Colored Coins

But those have not been implemented in to the protocol yet. But, what we could do is create a alt-coin that represents the shares.   

[bitmoon]

i think more crashing will come, some US are sleeping i guess

[shrodes]

Well after the whole drama with the website design, I'm not overly optimistic about the design of a complex trading system probably created by whoever made the current ActM website.

I think the best option would be to go direct shares (though it makes liquidating shares more difficult), and hire someone to manage this if required.

You've seen this, right? http://mpex.co/

LOL. I think we can at least hit a slightly higher mark than that.

I meant more about the technical design rather than the graphic design. A trading engine with robust security would be quite difficult to engineer I'd imagine, and I'd like to know more about the development of this site before we all jump ship over to it. It's good forward thinking, but the site also has to be extremely secure as we're dealing with finances, and there has to be some concern given to whether this solution would change anything at all for US shareholders.