[ANN] [NAUT] Nautiluscoin - First Coin w/Stabilization Fund - Digishield

[IncreaseMyT]

PS we busted through the EMA on the 1 day and the 3 day looks like its going to shatter it...........  hopefully some POS news will hit soon and off to da moon we go 

[1714915770]

1714915770

[Doging]

http://www.coindesk.com/new-york-bitlicense-views-inside-bitcoin-industry/

“I think it’s unfortunate, it’s not timely. The industry is very, very young and trying to regulate it now is entirely premature. Like the Internet, you need to give these things time to develop and see where the problem areas are.” - Patrick Murck, general counsel at the Bitcoin Foundation

Roger Ver, a fervent opponent of the proposals, said BitLicenses are “just a guise to protect the banks and other established industries” from competition that bitcoin would bring.

“This will eliminate the college dorm room startup. It will eliminate the young entrepreneur who is willing to put in 100 hours per week, but who doesn’t have $100,000 for his first two months of legal bills. It will make innovation the purview of large companies, which is to say, it will diminish innovation.” - Erik Voorhees

“These regulations do not even highlight the distinction between digital assets and digital currencies. Without representing the difference between the two, the NYDFS is issuing indiscriminate guidelines that threaten to destroy bitcoin. Numerous businesses have told me they are ready to block out all New York IPs from their servers, and will not do business in this jurisdiction if these proposed regulations are enacted.” - Chamber of Digital Commerce

Community Consensus:

“The consensus among bitcoin entrepreneurs at our recent conferences in Chicago and San Francisco has been to block New York customers rather than comply with the regulations.”

Now here's what your hero Brian Kelly says about the exact same legislation:

"This (introduction of bitcoin regulation) was the right move at the right time."

-----------

Notice anything different here? Notice anything different between Brian's opinion and every single other opinion given by every recognized community leader of bitcoin?

Brian Kelly IS paving the way for a Wall Street takeover of the cryptocurrency scene, by slowly innoculating users into the belief that big business and government intrusion into their lives is actually a good thing and not the reason why the world is currently bursting apart at the seams.

Brian Kelly is definitely a snake oil salesman. He's a turncoat, a double-agent, a traitor and an enemy of freedom. He cares about nothing except getting himself and his rich friends even richer. As a man who built his entire career around Wall Street you should know better than to expect anything else from him.

You're selectively quoting an article from the 18th of July and here's the bits you probably didn't read.

"it is critical for the New York DFS to honor its commitment to not stifle innovation" - doesn't sound like they've done that.

"over the next 45 days, the digital-currency community will have an opportunity to opine on the proposed rules" - that's what's happening now.

"ideally, regulations will be light-handed enough to encourage those in the digital currency space to voluntarily submit to regulation" - doesn't sound like they'll be voluntarily submitting.

So please stop misrepresenting things, it's like you are obsessed with BK for having an opinion you disagree with. I also like the way you presume we're all stupid sheep that can't think for ourselves.  

There's plenty of actual snake oil salesmen out there so go hassle them.

[FlyingMongoose]

http://www.coindesk.com/new-york-bitlicense-views-inside-bitcoin-industry/

“I think it’s unfortunate, it’s not timely. The industry is very, very young and trying to regulate it now is entirely premature. Like the Internet, you need to give these things time to develop and see where the problem areas are.” - Patrick Murck, general counsel at the Bitcoin Foundation

Roger Ver, a fervent opponent of the proposals, said BitLicenses are “just a guise to protect the banks and other established industries” from competition that bitcoin would bring.

“This will eliminate the college dorm room startup. It will eliminate the young entrepreneur who is willing to put in 100 hours per week, but who doesn’t have $100,000 for his first two months of legal bills. It will make innovation the purview of large companies, which is to say, it will diminish innovation.” - Erik Voorhees

“These regulations do not even highlight the distinction between digital assets and digital currencies. Without representing the difference between the two, the NYDFS is issuing indiscriminate guidelines that threaten to destroy bitcoin. Numerous businesses have told me they are ready to block out all New York IPs from their servers, and will not do business in this jurisdiction if these proposed regulations are enacted.” - Chamber of Digital Commerce

Community Consensus:

“The consensus among bitcoin entrepreneurs at our recent conferences in Chicago and San Francisco has been to block New York customers rather than comply with the regulations.”

Now here's what your hero Brian Kelly says about the exact same legislation:

"This (introduction of bitcoin regulation) was the right move at the right time."

-----------

Notice anything different here? Notice anything different between Brian's opinion and every single other opinion given by every recognized community leader of bitcoin?

Brian Kelly IS paving the way for a Wall Street takeover of the cryptocurrency scene, by slowly innoculating users into the belief that big business and government intrusion into their lives is actually a good thing and not the reason why the world is currently bursting apart at the seams.

Brian Kelly is definitely a snake oil salesman. He's a turncoat, a double-agent, a traitor and an enemy of freedom. He cares about nothing except getting himself and his rich friends even richer. As a man who built his entire career around Wall Street you should know better than to expect anything else from him.

You're selectively quoting an article from the 18th of July and here's the bits you probably didn't read.

"it is critical for the New York DFS to honor its commitment to not stifle innovation" - doesn't sound like they've done that.

"over the next 45 days, the digital-currency community will have an opportunity to opine on the proposed rules" - that's what's happening now.

"ideally, regulations will be light-handed enough to encourage those in the digital currency space to voluntarily submit to regulation" - doesn't sound like they'll be voluntarily submitting.

So please stop misrepresenting things, it's like you are obsessed with BK for having an opinion you disagree with. I also like the way you presume we're all stupid sheep that can't think for ourselves.  

There's plenty of actual snake oil salesmen out there so go hassle them.

I've also noticed a lot of claimed direct correlation between BK's opinion and this specific regulation without hard evidence of BK stating he supports this particular regulation.

I think what needs to be understood is BK's opinion (and he can correct me if I'm wrong but I have interpreted it correctly in the past).
Regulation is an unavoidable fact that will happen, it would be better for those in the crypto-arena to write and maintain this regulation than those in the government (especially if acted upon quickly).

This is kind of key here because it actually supports nutildah's opinion posted a number of pages back: That financial regulation from the government fails and that the wage and income gap (from that legislation) has increased since it started. (Hear that BK and nutildah actually agree on something).

His opinion also states that those in this private sector (those in the crypto-arena) should be the ones handling the regulation writing and maintenance (not the state/federal government/banks but us INDIVIDUALS).

Glad to have you in our corner nutildah. Glad to see you finally supporting NAUT.

Anyway, as it is an inevitability is it not time that someone form the Virtual Currency Proponents Board, an international representative board that holds the interest of all virtual currencies at heart and actively operates to write and enforce legislation that supports virtual currencies? I mean there's specific foundations and stuff for independent coins and whatnot, but why not an international non-prop advocacy group for all virtual currencies? Ultimately if we just sit here complaining that the government is screwing us it's not getting anything done, how about we actually do something?

My own news: My project is going well, I believe I am on target for my announcement date :-)

[AstroNectar]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

[BTCrawl]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

He's not.

[AstroNectar]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

He's not.

According to the HitBTC Development Team in an email they sent me, "Unfortunately, Brian Kelly, the Nautilus coin founder, informed us that he is against listing NAUT on our exchange. For this reason, we will not add NAUT, unless Brian changes his mind about that."

[BTCrawl]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

He's not.

According to the HitBTC Development Team in an email they sent me, "Unfortunately, Brian Kelly, the Nautilus coin founder, informed us that he is against listing NAUT on our exchange. For this reason, we will not add NAUT, unless Brian changes his mind about that."

That's odd, I wasn't aware of it. Perhaps they wanted money to list Naut, or perhaps he was turned off by this http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/25mpbf/hitbtcs_volume_is_very_suspicious/

"I posted this somewhere else, I feel like HitBTC is a very shady exchange and at any point when they feel they have enough customer funds they will disappear. They are probably falsifying their volume to gain market share so people will trade on their exchange and keep BTC there.

I've seen this happen dozens of times the past 4 years of being involved in Bitcoin. Please do not use this exchange.

This exchange is trying really hard to stay anonymous. I've asked them countless times to give us more info about who they are."

Doesn't seem like a big loss if that's the case.

[AstroNectar]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

He's not.

According to the HitBTC Development Team in an email they sent me, "Unfortunately, Brian Kelly, the Nautilus coin founder, informed us that he is against listing NAUT on our exchange. For this reason, we will not add NAUT, unless Brian changes his mind about that."

That's odd, I wasn't aware of it. Perhaps they wanted money to list Naut, or perhaps he was turned off by this http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/25mpbf/hitbtcs_volume_is_very_suspicious/

"I posted this somewhere else, I feel like HitBTC is a very shady exchange and at any point when they feel they have enough customer funds they will disappear. They are probably falsifying their volume to gain market share so people will trade on their exchange and keep BTC there.

I've seen this happen dozens of times the past 4 years of being involved in Bitcoin. Please do not use this exchange.

This exchange is trying really hard to stay anonymous. I've asked them countless times to give us more info about who they are."

Doesn't seem like a big loss if that's the case.

Thanks for pulling that up. This provides me more confidence in BK.

[FlyingMongoose]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

He's not.

According to the HitBTC Development Team in an email they sent me, "Unfortunately, Brian Kelly, the Nautilus coin founder, informed us that he is against listing NAUT on our exchange. For this reason, we will not add NAUT, unless Brian changes his mind about that."

That's odd, I wasn't aware of it. Perhaps they wanted money to list Naut, or perhaps he was turned off by this http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/25mpbf/hitbtcs_volume_is_very_suspicious/

"I posted this somewhere else, I feel like HitBTC is a very shady exchange and at any point when they feel they have enough customer funds they will disappear. They are probably falsifying their volume to gain market share so people will trade on their exchange and keep BTC there.

I've seen this happen dozens of times the past 4 years of being involved in Bitcoin. Please do not use this exchange.

This exchange is trying really hard to stay anonymous. I've asked them countless times to give us more info about who they are."

Doesn't seem like a big loss if that's the case.

Thanks for pulling that up. This provides me more confidence in BK.

I agree. This shows sure diligence from him.

[Doging]

You don't see people asking exchanges not to list their coins very often.

[whatdidshedo]

You don't see people asking exchanges not to list their coins very often.

new trend exchange not listing coin price goes up lol

[Lord Of The Internet]

You don't see people asking exchanges not to list their coins very often.

wow.  i wonder what happened.  It had to have been something in particular.  I just got an email from hitbtc saying they same thing ... That BK changed his mind and is now actually AGAINST listing on there.

i'm very curious because it all seemed legit

[MadGhost]

Why is Brian Kelly against listing NAUT on HitBTC?

may be he do not like them that is why.

[IncreaseMyT]

Well we had discussed some pages back in this thread the worries of a POS, and I think a lot of us agreed the exchanges were the weakest link in the chain.

If there was a possibility of a 51% attack, the easiest way someone could attain that amount of coins would be through theft of an exchange.

So I am all for $NAUT listing NAUT on any exchanges that are not proven protected exchanges.  Since a coin is only as strong as its weakest link, the exchanges become links in your chain, so to have NAUT listed on an exchange, I personally think they need to sign some sort of agreement stating they will keep x amount of coins offline.

If you look at the mint pal problem, this is exactly what happened, they did not have the coins offline like they were suppose to.

Holders of NAUT or any coin for that matter, should not have to pay for a mistake like that.  This means exchanges need to be scrutinized before being able to just set up a website and list a coin.

This goes right back to the regulation that we need, that everyone is so afraid of.  People will say regulation will kill BTC and I say without regulation, BTC is already dead.

There are gonna be things the community doesn't like about regulation, but it is a give and take, there has to be some compromise.


PS no one has mentioned that moolah bought mintpal?  I think there may be some really good news soon about mintpal and dollars to naut and naut to dollars This is pure speculation on my part, I have not heard anything at all.

[AdamJohnston_]

Or you just don't list your coins on the exchange

[Doging]

I think an extra incentive for people to keep their coins off exchange is the best option.

[nutildah]

Meanwhile, Brian Kelly's friends over at JP Morgan are trying to patent the idea of bitcoin!

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/barbarians-gate-jp-morgan-bitcoin-driven-payment-revolution-1460765

Jealous they didn't (couldn't) think of it themselves, they are now trying to create the legal framework to give themselves complete ownership (and centralized control) over the entire concept of cryptocurrency.

Why regulation is bad.

Regulation is bad because it will be written by those who stand to gain the most from having such regulation in place, chiefly the banks and masters of Wall Street.

This will assuredly be the case as it has already been scientifically demonstrated that public opinion has no effect on the setting of monetary policy and that it is instead set by whichever corporations or PACs are currently paying the most money to congress. In this case, policy is being set by the most powerful lobbying force in the universe - the financial services lobby.

Thusly the true utility of bitcoin will be destroyed and the 99% will once again be completely under the control of the 1%.

[nutildah]

Thusly the true utility of bitcoin will be destroyed and the 99% will once again be completely under the control of the 1%.

But I mean, maybe you guys want this. Maybe this is your final goal. To use the rest of the world as your slave base because it makes you feel like more of a man. Even though you've earned nothing in this world and owe everything to your parents and good fortune.

[Doging]

Thusly the true utility of bitcoin will be destroyed and the 99% will once again be completely under the control of the 1%.

But I mean, maybe you guys want this. Maybe this is your final goal. To use the rest of the world as your slave base because it makes you feel like more of a man. Even though you've earned nothing in this world and owe everything to your parents and good fortune.

You need help.

[FlyingMongoose]

Again nutildah, I'm glad to see you're agreeing with the sentiments BK has placed forth in that the lawmakers and legislatures should not be the ones to write the regulation, but those of us in the crypto-world. Always great to have supporters.

Note I've yet to see nutildah provide HARD evidence that BK specifically supports any specific proposed legislature or regulation.

I have also NEVER seen Brian Kelly's name specifically mentioned in any article nutildah posts.

I have only ever seen BK state that he believes the regulation is an inevitability and that we should be the ones to write it and NOT the banks and whatnot.