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

[purplejaguar]

I have kept you guys informed as to all the information in which I have been given, there is no more information to be given. When there is I share it, every time, every bit of news I get, or catch wind of, I have brought forth here. If you guys don't want to listen or read up then that's on you. It is not my responsibility to teach you how to scroll your browser above the most recent post, or click the link that takes you to the last page(s).

And again a new dev has been selected. (I believe this is post number 4 in which I have stated this, of course it could be more).
https://twitter.com/Nautiluscoin/status/532549920285556737 <-- third time this has been linked to my knowledge.

And if you'd like I can copy out of my personal messages here from jyap to again post that he said he was working on it. It will be a repost though.

And that would probably the cause of thios sell off... "jyap", really? Is it the best BK can do? Julian ("jyap") is working, as far as I know, in his own coin, jumbucks or whatever it's name is, while picking up the crumbs left by the totally discredited Dan Metcalf and collecting money for "code reviews" that, apparently, is a very good way of making quick money these days. Julian was involved with the code review of PINK several months ago and participated in a behind the scenes deal with PINK's developers -where they sold him one million coins, supposedly at market prices-. This is obviously ok with both Julian and those developers who have unloaded many millions of coins off-market, which is amazing to me because it cannot be less ethic even by desiugn... nore more damaging for the coin. The relationship with PINK continues and Jumbucks just announces his agreement with the PINK devs to offer mining for Pink in the Jumbucks multi mine... for a price, of course, roughly the times the fees any other mining operation charges. Obviously this is quite alright with not just PINK's devs, but also Mr "jyap", BK's new developer. If "jyap" follows his modus operandi from the past, he would have engineered a behind the scenes, off-market deal with BK by which BK would have unloaded a considerable amount of NAUT at "favorable prices", if not free altogether, in exchange for those services. No transparency whatsoever. And still some post that this is NOT BK's coin, yes the one he doesn't make a single post no matter how deep the price crisis. That one.

So now some of us have at least some ideas as to why the coin went all the way down to 5000 and change. Not much reason to celebrate, is there?

Hello Barabbas,

I happened to check the other day and I have approximately 2200 NAUT that I bought on the open market.  2000 NAUT was bought well over the current price.  This is in an offline wallet.

There is no "behind the scenes" deal with the Pinkcoin developers regarding the code review.  I did the code review for Pinkcoin FREE because they asked nicely and because I wanted to set an example at the time in the crypto community.  Perhaps I am strange in that I dislike scam coins?  I reviewed the code and the blockchain and signed off on what I wrote.  I bought 1 million Pinkcoin at the time at market rates (I believe around 22 satoshis) because I liked the coin and the honest direction they were taking.  I have approximately 1.5 million Pinkcoin which is held in an offline wallet.  I bought an addition 500k Pinkcoin off the markets, again well over the current price.

Regarding the Pinkcoin addition to the Jumbucks multipool, Twitter user @abilliondoge started a campaign to get a Pinkcoin multipool:
https://twitter.com/abilliondoge/status/526081558416216065

I noticed this and came up with a win win solution.  Outlined here, just today in a press release I wrote 2 days ago:
http://www.altcointoday.com/jumbucks-releases-a-multicoin-multipool-with-launch-partner-pinkcoin/

I have helped out a lot of coins over time and had countless discussions with coin developers and people in the crypto community without payment.

Honestly, I don't even "need" crypto in my life.  I have a full time job and career which pays fine.

With NAUT I am picking up the pieces of an an abandoned PoS transition.  I have already made a statement about this.

Outlining all this is obviously a waste of my time.  Baseless allegations against me is honestly also a waste of your time.  You are just making yourself look bad.  Seriously, dig your own hole.  I try and help out coins that I like.

I voluntarily run the NAUT block explorer:
http://nautinsight.buddylabsapps.com

Hmm, let me see.  Oh looks like I have been donated 200.709 NAUT over time by people I don't even know.

I am also very public.  Here you can read my profile:
http://cryptoasian.com/jbs-jumbucks/

I also made a coin which is now called Jumbucks.  You can check out the web site:
http://getjumbucks.com

I run a free weekly newsletter called Cryptocurrency Weekly:
http://cryptocurrencyweekly.com

Thanks,
Julian

Julian, I am not going to call you a liar... but I need to refresh your memory because, obviously, you have forgotten the truth... as posted by you here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624017.msg7042831#msg7042831

And I copy/paste: FULL DISCLOSURE: I often invest in coins from time to time and have recently tweeted the coins I own on my Twitter account @jyap. I liked that Pinkcoin did not have a premine and the transparency of the group when questions were brought up.  I personally bought 1,000,000 Pinkcoins at market rate directly from @CryptoCayce since I liked the group's outreach plans and projects mentioned in their annoucement. (bolded by me).

It matters because, as I had posted, you not only find this behavior acceptable, but even ethical and you openly disclose it. Do you know what the purchase in the open market of 1.5 million PINK would do to the price of the coin? Oh yes, you do. Investors on those coins are literally robbed on such off-market action.

Now, regarding NAUT, what exactly is the nature of your collaboration here? Are you being paid or otherwise compensated or is it an at will kind of shake hands deal where you are not accountable for any results, lack thereof or deadlines? Are we to expect that NAUT would be mined at the Jumbucks pool for a fee triple the going rate in other pools? No euphemisms, please.

And if you are going to issue a rebuttal of anything I post, at least check before what you yourself have publicly admitted to.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a coin at market price off exchange. Absolutely nothing at all. It is utterly ridiculous to take the position that coins should only be bought on exchanges. Utterly ridiculous.


barabbas, go FUD yourself.

It is called insider trading and people go to jail for it. In the real, regulated world, which is where NAUT wants to be.

I will after you, purplejaguar, fuck yourself, ok?

Oh goodie, I was hoping you'd respond   And no that is not what is called insider trading, maybe you can look up that definition. In the real world perhaps what jyap did would be equivalent to trading stocks off exchange... which is perfectly legal to do.

Oh look..AAPL execs sold stocks at a convenient time for them... INSIDER TRADING! THEY'RE GOING TO JAIL!!

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-execs-sold-143-million-worth-of-stock-2014-9

barabbas... I always enjoy reading your posts...I have for months. They provide great entertainment value  

Your ignorance is not only evident but it's showing inevitable. When developers (or executives) trade within either themselves or others, it's called INSIDER TRADING. And you go to jail for it. Get it? And no, no executives or insiders in any capacity, are allowed to even sell to others, IN THE OPEN MARKETS, except during the very small, long pre-determined "window" in which they are allowed to do so, again, IN THE OPEN MARKET.

Trying to teach your father how to make children will leave you exposed of your shortcomings 100 out of 100 times. But, apparently, you n want to be the object of everyone's -not just mine- jokes.

If you believe I provide entertainment here, you should see the pay-per-view version... you'd have convulsions...

Go ahead call the SEC and tell them you've found 'insider trading'. 

But seriously though, there are lots of instances in crypto that could be considered insider trading (if this were a regulated industry) but you are quite hilarious to call jyap buying 1m PINK off market insider trading. 

[IncreaseMyT]

more volume is good.

[PilotofBTC]

I guess when a company sells stock directly to an investor "off market" that is insider trading? Many companies do this... Home Depot, Kellog, Pfizer, General Electric, etc. Alert the SEC now!

[barabbas]

I have kept you guys informed as to all the information in which I have been given, there is no more information to be given. When there is I share it, every time, every bit of news I get, or catch wind of, I have brought forth here. If you guys don't want to listen or read up then that's on you. It is not my responsibility to teach you how to scroll your browser above the most recent post, or click the link that takes you to the last page(s).

And again a new dev has been selected. (I believe this is post number 4 in which I have stated this, of course it could be more).
https://twitter.com/Nautiluscoin/status/532549920285556737 <-- third time this has been linked to my knowledge.

And if you'd like I can copy out of my personal messages here from jyap to again post that he said he was working on it. It will be a repost though.

And that would probably the cause of thios sell off... "jyap", really? Is it the best BK can do? Julian ("jyap") is working, as far as I know, in his own coin, jumbucks or whatever it's name is, while picking up the crumbs left by the totally discredited Dan Metcalf and collecting money for "code reviews" that, apparently, is a very good way of making quick money these days. Julian was involved with the code review of PINK several months ago and participated in a behind the scenes deal with PINK's developers -where they sold him one million coins, supposedly at market prices-. This is obviously ok with both Julian and those developers who have unloaded many millions of coins off-market, which is amazing to me because it cannot be less ethic even by desiugn... nore more damaging for the coin. The relationship with PINK continues and Jumbucks just announces his agreement with the PINK devs to offer mining for Pink in the Jumbucks multi mine... for a price, of course, roughly the times the fees any other mining operation charges. Obviously this is quite alright with not just PINK's devs, but also Mr "jyap", BK's new developer. If "jyap" follows his modus operandi from the past, he would have engineered a behind the scenes, off-market deal with BK by which BK would have unloaded a considerable amount of NAUT at "favorable prices", if not free altogether, in exchange for those services. No transparency whatsoever. And still some post that this is NOT BK's coin, yes the one he doesn't make a single post no matter how deep the price crisis. That one.

So now some of us have at least some ideas as to why the coin went all the way down to 5000 and change. Not much reason to celebrate, is there?

Hello Barabbas,

I happened to check the other day and I have approximately 2200 NAUT that I bought on the open market.  2000 NAUT was bought well over the current price.  This is in an offline wallet.

There is no "behind the scenes" deal with the Pinkcoin developers regarding the code review.  I did the code review for Pinkcoin FREE because they asked nicely and because I wanted to set an example at the time in the crypto community.  Perhaps I am strange in that I dislike scam coins?  I reviewed the code and the blockchain and signed off on what I wrote.  I bought 1 million Pinkcoin at the time at market rates (I believe around 22 satoshis) because I liked the coin and the honest direction they were taking.  I have approximately 1.5 million Pinkcoin which is held in an offline wallet.  I bought an addition 500k Pinkcoin off the markets, again well over the current price.

Regarding the Pinkcoin addition to the Jumbucks multipool, Twitter user @abilliondoge started a campaign to get a Pinkcoin multipool:
https://twitter.com/abilliondoge/status/526081558416216065

I noticed this and came up with a win win solution.  Outlined here, just today in a press release I wrote 2 days ago:
http://www.altcointoday.com/jumbucks-releases-a-multicoin-multipool-with-launch-partner-pinkcoin/

I have helped out a lot of coins over time and had countless discussions with coin developers and people in the crypto community without payment.

Honestly, I don't even "need" crypto in my life.  I have a full time job and career which pays fine.

With NAUT I am picking up the pieces of an an abandoned PoS transition.  I have already made a statement about this.

Outlining all this is obviously a waste of my time.  Baseless allegations against me is honestly also a waste of your time.  You are just making yourself look bad.  Seriously, dig your own hole.  I try and help out coins that I like.

I voluntarily run the NAUT block explorer:
http://nautinsight.buddylabsapps.com

Hmm, let me see.  Oh looks like I have been donated 200.709 NAUT over time by people I don't even know.

I am also very public.  Here you can read my profile:
http://cryptoasian.com/jbs-jumbucks/

I also made a coin which is now called Jumbucks.  You can check out the web site:
http://getjumbucks.com

I run a free weekly newsletter called Cryptocurrency Weekly:
http://cryptocurrencyweekly.com

Thanks,
Julian

Julian, I am not going to call you a liar... but I need to refresh your memory because, obviously, you have forgotten the truth... as posted by you here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624017.msg7042831#msg7042831

And I copy/paste: FULL DISCLOSURE: I often invest in coins from time to time and have recently tweeted the coins I own on my Twitter account @jyap. I liked that Pinkcoin did not have a premine and the transparency of the group when questions were brought up.  I personally bought 1,000,000 Pinkcoins at market rate directly from @CryptoCayce since I liked the group's outreach plans and projects mentioned in their annoucement. (bolded by me).

It matters because, as I had posted, you not only find this behavior acceptable, but even ethical and you openly disclose it. Do you know what the purchase in the open market of 1.5 million PINK would do to the price of the coin? Oh yes, you do. Investors on those coins are literally robbed on such off-market action.

Now, regarding NAUT, what exactly is the nature of your collaboration here? Are you being paid or otherwise compensated or is it an at will kind of shake hands deal where you are not accountable for any results, lack thereof or deadlines? Are we to expect that NAUT would be mined at the Jumbucks pool for a fee triple the going rate in other pools? No euphemisms, please.

And if you are going to issue a rebuttal of anything I post, at least check before what you yourself have publicly admitted to.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a coin at market price off exchange. Absolutely nothing at all. It is utterly ridiculous to take the position that coins should only be bought on exchanges. Utterly ridiculous.


barabbas, go FUD yourself.

It is called insider trading and people go to jail for it. In the real, regulated world, which is where NAUT wants to be.

I will after you, purplejaguar, fuck yourself, ok?

Oh goodie, I was hoping you'd respond   And no that is not what is called insider trading, maybe you can look up that definition. In the real world perhaps what jyap did would be equivalent to trading stocks off exchange... which is perfectly legal to do.

Oh look..AAPL execs sold stocks at a convenient time for them... INSIDER TRADING! THEY'RE GOING TO JAIL!!

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-execs-sold-143-million-worth-of-stock-2014-9

barabbas... I always enjoy reading your posts...I have for months. They provide great entertainment value  

Your ignorance is not only evident but it's showing inevitable. When developers (or executives) trade within either themselves or others, it's called INSIDER TRADING. And you go to jail for it. Get it? And no, no executives or insiders in any capacity, are allowed to even sell to others, IN THE OPEN MARKETS, except during the very small, long pre-determined "window" in which they are allowed to do so, again, IN THE OPEN MARKET.

Trying to teach your father how to make children will leave you exposed of your shortcomings 100 out of 100 times. But, apparently, you n want to be the object of everyone's -not just mine- jokes.

If you believe I provide entertainment here, you should see the pay-per-view version... you'd have convulsions...

Go ahead call the SEC and tell them you've found 'insider trading'. 

But seriously though, there are lots of instances in crypto that could be considered insider trading (if this were a regulated industry) but you are quite hilarious to call jyap buying 1m PINK off market insider trading. 

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others. That's why the sheriff is coming to town mand you and other will soon learn a hard lesson in the most elemental ethics. The hard way, of course.

Once again for the ignorants: You can do with your coins whatever you want, sell them to whomever or throw them away if you like. On a regulated market though, IF YOU ARE AN INSIDER, you simply can NOT. It is ILLEGAL and punishable with jail. Get it now?

[barabbas]

I guess when a company sells stock directly to an investor "off market" that is insider trading? Many companies do this... Home Depot, Kellog, Pfizer, General Electric, etc. Alert the SEC now!

A company can sell stock, under regulation and through public reporting and channels if complying with rules, laws and regulations. A COMPANY, not an insider on any company. Do you see the difference? A company has also a lot of other legal obligations to comply with and certainly can sell it's assets, if approved by stakeholders and boards. An individual can NOT. Like I said, insiders are restricted to two small windows per year in which they can sell their stock and have to predetermine the amount of stock they sell, so they cannot either benefit from bull run markets nor influence the price of the stock otherwise. It's the law. And, of course, the ethical thing to do.

The lesson is over.

[Doging]

I don't care if Julian bought some pinkcoin off exchange. This is the NAUT thread.

[delong]

A company can sell stock, under regulation and through public reporting and channels if complying with rules, laws and regulations. A COMPANY, not an insider on any company. Do you see the difference? A company has also a lot of other legal obligations to comply with and certainly can sell it's assets, if approved by stakeholders and boards. An individual can NOT. Like I said, insiders are restricted to two small windows per year in which they can sell their stock and have to predetermine the amount of stock they sell, so they cannot either benefit from bull run markets nor influence the price of the stock otherwise. It's the law. And, of course, the ethical thing to do.

The lesson is over.

what a didactic, perseverating bore you are.

[IncreaseMyT]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others.

You sure about that?

“It has not been tested, but I do believe we have the authority because bitcoin, by I think a very rational reading of our statute, classifies as a commodity and the definition of a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act."

http://www.coindesk.com/commissioner-claims-cftc-can-intervene-bitcoin-markets/

[barabbas]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others.

You sure about that?

“It has not been tested, but I do believe we have the authority because bitcoin, by I think a very rational reading of our statute, classifies as a commodity and the definition of a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act."

http://www.coindesk.com/commissioner-claims-cftc-can-intervene-bitcoin-markets/

There's certainly no precedent but the statute could be enforceable, I don't know. What I do know is that when regulation comes, mane "loose behaviors", for lack of a better term, could be and probably will be re-examined. Either way, is crypto is to ever be taken seriously, obvious ethically-lacking behaviors, such a back room deals, auctioning of features and software created on behalf of investors, etc. need to be eliminated. People used to "help" (you just have to love the euphemism) competing projects, need to be brought to line.

[IncreaseMyT]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others.

You sure about that?

“It has not been tested, but I do believe we have the authority because bitcoin, by I think a very rational reading of our statute, classifies as a commodity and the definition of a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act."

http://www.coindesk.com/commissioner-claims-cftc-can-intervene-bitcoin-markets/

There's certainly no precedent but the statute could be enforceable, I don't know. What I do know is that when regulation comes, mane "loose behaviors", for lack of a better term, could be and probably will be re-examined. Either way, is crypto is to ever be taken seriously, obvious ethically-lacking behaviors, such a back room deals, auctioning of features and software created on behalf of investors, etc. need to be eliminated. People used to "help" (you just have to love the euphemism) competing projects, need to be brought to line.

So basically your wondering if crypto will be taken seriously?

What is a back room deal? Is this supposed to be a peer to peer currency/commodity?

auctioning of features? what do you mean?

[barabbas]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others.

You sure about that?

“It has not been tested, but I do believe we have the authority because bitcoin, by I think a very rational reading of our statute, classifies as a commodity and the definition of a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act."

http://www.coindesk.com/commissioner-claims-cftc-can-intervene-bitcoin-markets/

There's certainly no precedent but the statute could be enforceable, I don't know. What I do know is that when regulation comes, mane "loose behaviors", for lack of a better term, could be and probably will be re-examined. Either way, is crypto is to ever be taken seriously, obvious ethically-lacking behaviors, such a back room deals, auctioning of features and software created on behalf of investors, etc. need to be eliminated. People used to "help" (you just have to love the euphemism) competing projects, need to be brought to line.

So basically your wondering if crypto will be taken seriously?

What is a back room deal? Is this supposed to be a peer to peer currency/commodity?

auctioning of features? what do you mean?

No, not basically. Definitely. The bad guys have to get burned off crypto if it is to be taken seriously. A back room deal is one made in secret, without any transparency at all. In the real world, those are strictly (at least in intention) regulated and the Feds watch over them besides providing incentives in the millions of dollars to whistle blowers. In the crypto world are the coin of choice of the bad players. I take you have read recent scandals in which coin developers are on the payroll of pump and dump groups such as the ones headed by Prometheus and bobsurplus. Before that, the infamous Black Hand that thoroughly manipulated Black Coin with the full knowledge, support and participation of its dev team. Anyway those are some of the back room deals most notorious, there are many others going on right now that have been more discreetly handled ... so far. Other back room deals are auctions and purchases of features developed -often with backing of donations from investors- by the devs of some coins that are either for hire on a part time basis -like Julian here- of have their features developed available for sale or auction to whoever bid the highest, so they are not necessarily as interested in the success -and raise in price- of the coin as they are in selling those features or services to other competing projects.

The amazing euphemisms that they use, range from "helping" other projects, are just hilarious. Since they actually believe it is not unethical behavior in some cases, they gladly point out that it is sort of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" and, as such, perfectly acceptable,

Anyway, the whole back room scene is just another world of which we are now catching glimpses and only through disenchanted or disenfranchise otherwise gladly and willful participants in the many versions of the shady schemes that rule the alt world and which the general investor is not aware of.

[purplejaguar]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others. That's why the sheriff is coming to town mand you and other will soon learn a hard lesson in the most elemental ethics. The hard way, of course.

Once again for the ignorants: You can do with your coins whatever you want, sell them to whomever or throw them away if you like. On a regulated market though, IF YOU ARE AN INSIDER, you simply can NOT. It is ILLEGAL and punishable with jail. Get it now?

Since I am such an ignorant, I will gladly acknowledge you are right if you can prove it. So far I have seen no merit to your argument that what jyap did in the post you linked to constitutes insider trading. Please provide links/definitions to back up your claims. Additionally please show how jyap and/or CryptoCayce benefited from this 'insider trading'. Here is the SEC's page on insider trading to start you off. http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm

[IncreaseMyT]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others.

You sure about that?

“It has not been tested, but I do believe we have the authority because bitcoin, by I think a very rational reading of our statute, classifies as a commodity and the definition of a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act."

http://www.coindesk.com/commissioner-claims-cftc-can-intervene-bitcoin-markets/

There's certainly no precedent but the statute could be enforceable, I don't know. What I do know is that when regulation comes, mane "loose behaviors", for lack of a better term, could be and probably will be re-examined. Either way, is crypto is to ever be taken seriously, obvious ethically-lacking behaviors, such a back room deals, auctioning of features and software created on behalf of investors, etc. need to be eliminated. People used to "help" (you just have to love the euphemism) competing projects, need to be brought to line.

So basically your wondering if crypto will be taken seriously?

What is a back room deal? Is this supposed to be a peer to peer currency/commodity?

auctioning of features? what do you mean?

No, not basically. Definitely. The bad guys have to get burned off crypto if it is to be taken seriously. A back room deal is one made in secret, without any transparency at all. In the real world, those are strictly (at least in intention) regulated and the Feds watch over them besides providing incentives in the millions of dollars to whistle blowers. In the crypto world are the coin of choice of the bad players. I take you have read recent scandals in which coin developers are on the payroll of pump and dump groups such as the ones headed by Prometheus and bobsurplus. Before that, the infamous Black Hand that thoroughly manipulated Black Coin with the full knowledge, support and participation of its dev team. Anyway those are some of the back room deals most notorious, there are many others going on right now that have been more discreetly handled ... so far. Other back room deals are auctions and purchases of features developed -often with backing of donations from investors- by the devs of some coins that are either for hire on a part time basis -like Julian here- of have their features developed available for sale or auction to whoever bid the highest, so they are not necessarily as interested in the success -and raise in price- of the coin as they are in selling those features or services to other competing projects.

The amazing euphemisms that they use, range from "helping" other projects, are just hilarious. Since they actually believe it is not unethical behavior in some cases, they gladly point out that it is sort of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" and, as such, perfectly acceptable,

Anyway, the whole back room scene is just another world of which we are now catching glimpses and only through disenchanted or disenfranchise otherwise gladly and willful participants in the many versions of the shady schemes that rule the alt world and which the general investor is not aware of.

You are being ridiculous to insinuate that Jyap is anything remotely close to the BC and whatever other coin pump and dump.

Personally I don't consider one person buying crypto from another a "back room deal".  

What your talking about is way off base.  Naut needs a Dev, Jyap is familiar with the coin and has a good reputation.  I think its great he is working on the coin.

If Naut was worth some ridiculous amount maybe it would be even worth speculating about, but its not.

There will always be bad guys no matter what.  Are there no bad guys on wall-street?

BTC is already being taken very seriously, and is gaining traction at the moment.  All the other coins are super speculative and you should go into them knowing that.

[barabbas]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others. That's why the sheriff is coming to town mand you and other will soon learn a hard lesson in the most elemental ethics. The hard way, of course.

Once again for the ignorants: You can do with your coins whatever you want, sell them to whomever or throw them away if you like. On a regulated market though, IF YOU ARE AN INSIDER, you simply can NOT. It is ILLEGAL and punishable with jail. Get it now?

Since I am such an ignorant, I will gladly acknowledge you are right if you can prove it. So far I have seen no merit to your argument that what jyap did in the post you linked to constitutes insider trading. Please provide links/definitions to back up your claims. Additionally please show how jyap and/or CryptoCayce benefited from this 'insider trading'. Here is the SEC's page on insider trading to start you off. http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm

Gladly. If Julian would have wanted to purchase 1.5 million pink in the marketplace, his orders, to be fulfilled, would have created an increase in the price by themselves. It other words, he would have had to buy probably the entire book, or at least a significant part of it (I take you know what the "book" is?), therefore paying significantly more than he paid CryptoCayce for it. That's the way HE profited. CryptoCayce profited, conversely, because if he would have sold those 1.5 million pink in the market the opposite effect would have occurred and he wouldn't have obtained even remotely close to the "market price" he got from Julian. Since it was Julian buying and Cayce was not supposed to DUMP -it's called dump when devs sell their coins-, the market price of pink would have increased as a consequence of Julian's buy, therefore not only he benefited, not only Cayce benefited, but also ALL pink investors lost value on their investment due to that particular backroom operation. That is ILLEGAL INSIDER TRADING in the real world. And is punishable with jail and extremely high fines.

I have explained the a to z of how that is unethical on any perspective and illegal in the real world one. Now it is up to you to choose to believe what better suit your interests. It won't change the facts of what took place one bit.

[PilotofBTC]

Julian...

Don't waste your time with that guy.

Can you give an update on the PoS? Was any work actually done by Bryce and co? Did they ever get a version running on a test net?

If you need people to run your PoS wallet on a testnet, I'm willing. I leave my PC running 24/7 anyway, so keeping a node running is not a problem.

[IncreaseMyT]

Also I think its important to note the study that just came out showing BTC price is related to hype on the net and in media.  Alt coins are no different.  Do you consider that a pump and dump?

It is a part of what Crypto is, pumps based on speculation.

“Our results indicate that popularity of this cryptocurrency is one of the main factors driving the price. We observed that returns tend to be elevated whenever newspaper articles mention bitcoin more frequently and whenever the number of people searching for it on Google increases.”

http://www.coindesk.com/reasons-behind-bitcoins-price-media-hype/

So thats never gonna change.

You are making some very different accusations about black coin and implying Jyap is doing the same though, which is we todd ed.

[IncreaseMyT]

Gladly. If Julia would have wanted to purchase 1.5 million pink in the marketplace, his orders, to be fulfilled, would have created an increase in the price by themselves.

Thats so dumb!!!! So basically your saying the federal government is committing insider trading due to the auctioning of SR coins?

“This sealed bid auction is for a portion of the bitcoins contained in wallet files that resided on certain computer hardware belonging to Ross William Ulbricht, that were seized on or about October 24, 2013.”

http://www.coindesk.com/us-marshals-auction-50000-bitcoins-seized-ross-ulbricht/

[barabbas]

Gladly. If Julia would have wanted to purchase 1.5 million pink in the marketplace, his orders, to be fulfilled, would have created an increase in the price by themselves.

Thats so dumb!!!! So basically your saying the federal government is committing insider trading due to the auctioning of SR coins?

“This sealed bid auction is for a portion of the bitcoins contained in wallet files that resided on certain computer hardware belonging to Ross William Ulbricht, that were seized on or about October 24, 2013.”

http://www.coindesk.com/us-marshals-auction-50000-bitcoins-seized-ross-ulbricht/

No. You are dumb in pretending such correlation. The federal government regularly auctions off all kind of items and commodities it seizes from delinquents.
I know you understand clearly the differences, it just doesn't suit your personal agenda as a NAUT bagholder, that's all.

Otherwise, I don't imply anything. I state facts. It's up to you to make of them whatever implications better suit you.

As for reputation, in a world where investments go solely on reputation (i.e Supernet, Ethereum...) the reputation of Julian Yap seems to be doing quite a number on NAUT's price, don't you think?

[purplejaguar]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others. That's why the sheriff is coming to town mand you and other will soon learn a hard lesson in the most elemental ethics. The hard way, of course.

Once again for the ignorants: You can do with your coins whatever you want, sell them to whomever or throw them away if you like. On a regulated market though, IF YOU ARE AN INSIDER, you simply can NOT. It is ILLEGAL and punishable with jail. Get it now?

Since I am such an ignorant, I will gladly acknowledge you are right if you can prove it. So far I have seen no merit to your argument that what jyap did in the post you linked to constitutes insider trading. Please provide links/definitions to back up your claims. Additionally please show how jyap and/or CryptoCayce benefited from this 'insider trading'. Here is the SEC's page on insider trading to start you off. http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm

Gladly. If Julian would have wanted to purchase 1.5 million pink in the marketplace, his orders, to be fulfilled, would have created an increase in the price by themselves. It other words, he would have had to buy probably the entire book, or at least a significant part of it (I take you know what the "book" is?), therefore paying significantly more than he paid CryptoCayce for it. That's the way HE profited. CryptoCayce profited, conversely, because if he would have sold those 1.5 million pink in the market the opposite effect would have occurred and he wouldn't have obtained even remotely close to the "market price" he got from Julian. Since it was Julian buying and Cayce was not supposed to DUMP -it's called dump when devs sell their coins-, the market price of pink would have increased as a consequence of Julian's buy, therefore not only he benefited, not only Cayce benefited, but also ALL pink investors lost value on their investment due to that particular backroom operation. That is ILLEGAL INSIDER TRADING in the real world. And is punishable with jail and extremely high fines.

I have explained the a to z of how that is unethical on any perspective and illegal in the real world one. Now it is up to you to choose to believe what better suit your interests. It won't change the facts of what took place one bit.

Just as I thought...this is not insider trading. This is off exchange trading aka aver the counter trading in the financial world. Im sorry barabbas, but your claim is utterly ridiculous.

Coins dont have to be purchased/sold on an exchange. For that matter neither do stocks/bonds.

[barabbas]

I don't have to call the SEC because it is not (yet) regulated so what in the real world is obvious and punishable insider trading, in crypto not only is not penalized but considered normal, acceptable behavior by the likes of you and others. That's why the sheriff is coming to town mand you and other will soon learn a hard lesson in the most elemental ethics. The hard way, of course.

Once again for the ignorants: You can do with your coins whatever you want, sell them to whomever or throw them away if you like. On a regulated market though, IF YOU ARE AN INSIDER, you simply can NOT. It is ILLEGAL and punishable with jail. Get it now?

Since I am such an ignorant, I will gladly acknowledge you are right if you can prove it. So far I have seen no merit to your argument that what jyap did in the post you linked to constitutes insider trading. Please provide links/definitions to back up your claims. Additionally please show how jyap and/or CryptoCayce benefited from this 'insider trading'. Here is the SEC's page on insider trading to start you off. http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm

Gladly. If Julian would have wanted to purchase 1.5 million pink in the marketplace, his orders, to be fulfilled, would have created an increase in the price by themselves. It other words, he would have had to buy probably the entire book, or at least a significant part of it (I take you know what the "book" is?), therefore paying significantly more than he paid CryptoCayce for it. That's the way HE profited. CryptoCayce profited, conversely, because if he would have sold those 1.5 million pink in the market the opposite effect would have occurred and he wouldn't have obtained even remotely close to the "market price" he got from Julian. Since it was Julian buying and Cayce was not supposed to DUMP -it's called dump when devs sell their coins-, the market price of pink would have increased as a consequence of Julian's buy, therefore not only he benefited, not only Cayce benefited, but also ALL pink investors lost value on their investment due to that particular backroom operation. That is ILLEGAL INSIDER TRADING in the real world. And is punishable with jail and extremely high fines.

I have explained the a to z of how that is unethical on any perspective and illegal in the real world one. Now it is up to you to choose to believe what better suit your interests. It won't change the facts of what took place one bit.

Just as I thought...this is not insider trading. This is off exchange trading aka aver the counter trading in the financial world. Im sorry barabbas, but your claim is utterly ridiculous.

Coins dont have to be purchased/sold on an exchange. For that matter neither do stocks/bonds.

And you, AGAIN, choose to miss the point. CHOOSE... The difference between insider illegal trading and trading "over the counter" or in any other fashioon is that INSIDERS, are not legally allowed to do ANY SELLING which is not transparent and within the strict windows set. The cannot sell, period, when they want but only when they are allowed, regardless what the market price is. And they have to notify their intention to sell well in advance of such window periods.

Non insiders can, of course, as stated several times before, sell their investments when where and to whomk they choose. But INSIDERS can NOT.

Now back to choose whatever seudo reality you seem fit.