Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 06:42:37 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 [708] 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1808038 times)
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 07:39:46 AM
 #14141

The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

Perkins Coie is a great firm for crypto issues.  Overstock has good taste.


I'm less worried about the legality, because am not so involved, but I still can't figure out how Bitshares is supposed to work.
All assets created in the system are backed by Bitshares, yes?  So it would work fine if Bitshares price is rising always.
What stops the cascading effect when one asset gets called short on insufficient backing, and the collateral is then sold?
Doesn't this drive the collateral value down on all the other assets?  So when one fails, you may get multiple fails, and if there aren't enough buyers at the moment, you can get a cascade effect.  
It would seem a ripe peach of systemic risk for a crypto George Soros to plunder.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 07:40:40 AM
 #14142

Out of interest: Say you were given the task of designing a portfolio to survive 1000 years, what would it be comprised of?

Wow. That is a long time.


1000 years?  Might I suggest adding some seashells and arrow heads?  Inexpensive hedge, and all that.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
 #14143

First, I have never been involved in the Mastercoin project in any capacity at any time
Sorry about that. My memory must have glitched.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:09:19 PM
 #14144

shhhhh.  be quiet...
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:12:49 PM
 #14145

so what would really be cool here is for the $DJT to go back up and make a new high while the $DJI fails to do the same in a counter trend bounce.  that would trigger a Dow Theory non-confirmation which in my work is seen at a majority of major tops in the stock mkt going back over a hundred years.  we did have a mini-one at the recent top but it wasn't large enough in my opinion.  stay tuned:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:14:04 PM
 #14146

so what would really be cool here is for the $DJT to go back up and make a new high while the $DJI fails to do the same in a counter trend bounce.  that would trigger a Dow Theory non-confirmation which in my work is seen at a majority of major tops in the stock mkt going back over a hundred years.  we did have a mini-one at the recent top but it wasn't large enough in my opinion.  stay tuned:



all the while Bitcoin is kicking ass.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:21:54 PM
 #14147

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/524566140895649792
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:24:00 PM
 #14148

gold breaking up with first challenge @1305:

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:24:24 PM
 #14149

On a side note: Big Banks Start Charging Clients for Euro Deposits
http://online.wsj.com/articles/big-banks-start-charging-clients-for-euro-deposits-1413569321

Cheesy
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:26:16 PM
 #14150

On a side note: Big Banks Start Charging Clients for Euro Deposits
http://online.wsj.com/articles/big-banks-start-charging-clients-for-euro-deposits-1413569321

Cheesy

lol, what a freak show.

Bitcoin to the Moon.
Cortex7
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 02:40:36 PM
 #14151

Hey Cypherdoc,

I know Benjamin Fulford is not considered a reliable source by many, but nonetheless this makes for fascinating fiction if nothing else:

http://benjaminfulford.net/2014/10/20/did-the-dragon-family-take-control-of-the-federal-reserve-board/

If it were true then I think bitcoin (and gold) would go ballistic as folk leapt to a safe stepping stone during the transition, or do you think most would just buy yuan (if that were actually possible).

There are so many possibilities as to what may happen fairly soonish, most of them will send safety net securities to the moon if they happen.

kehtolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 611


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 02:53:41 PM
 #14152

Hey Cypherdoc,

I know Benjamin Fulford is not considered a reliable source by many, but nonetheless this makes for fascinating fiction if nothing else:

http://benjaminfulford.net/2014/10/20/did-the-dragon-family-take-control-of-the-federal-reserve-board/

If it were true then I think bitcoin (and gold) would go ballistic as folk leapt to a safe stepping stone during the transition, or do you think most would just buy yuan (if that were actually possible).

There are so many possibilities as to what may happen fairly soonish, most of them will send safety net securities to the moon if they happen.

Wow!

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"

There does not seem to be much substance to it, it is all unnamed sources, heresay etc. But definitely one of the more 'out there' things I've read today.

The last 24 hours were critical but the next 24 hours are criticaller!
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 21, 2014, 02:55:26 PM
 #14153

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"
Benjamin Fulford is not "a bit" mad...
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:18:41 PM
 #14154

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.


Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:47:17 PM
 #14155

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:50:09 PM
 #14156

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



there's something to be learned from GLBSE and Nefario, the first intended global stock trading system first implemented in 2011.  it got shut down after 2 attempts, the last being by the UK regulators.
kehtolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 611


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 03:50:29 PM
 #14157

All i have to say to that is... "That's a bit mad!"
Benjamin Fulford is not "a bit" mad...

Hehe.. ok, I didn't know him. Fully certifiably mad then, if he's like that all the time.

The last 24 hours were critical but the next 24 hours are criticaller!
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 04:01:51 PM
 #14158

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).



Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 21, 2014, 05:01:19 PM
 #14159

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).



OK so in these cases, they fine Daniel for $50k/$100k for coming up with this software (IDK why this would be the case) or throw him in jail worsed case both of which don't really affect the project itself in the grand scheme of things.

There is noone to go after... it is up to the buyer... the law he was charged(Securities Act of 1933) under states:

Often referred to as the "truth in securities" law, the Securities Act of 1933 has two basic objectives:

1) require that investors receive financial and other significant information concerning securities being offered for public sale; and

2) prohibit deceit, misrepresentations, and other fraud in the sale of securities.

Who is supposed to give them information? Invictus? OK they fine Invictus and tell them that all profits must be surrendered, what profits? Its a self serving ecosystem... they take away their pts/ags/btsx, thats fine....

#2 doesn't apply.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 21, 2014, 05:14:54 PM
 #14160

...
The underlying crimes in the cases don't matter. The point is that the "it wasn't fiat" defense didn't fly, so it's pretty darn reasonable to assume that if you're breaking some law or failing to comply with some regulation, you will not be able to use the same "I wasn't using dollars" defense to get off on a technicality. Morality hardly matters; the letter of the law/regs matters.

In the specific case of these asset-exchange platforms, those issuing equity equivalents onto them should probably be aware that the SEC has about 80 years worth of securities regulation on file, and they aren't gonna ignore that just because the securities are being issued in a way that doesn't touch dollars.

This is why Overstock's CounterParty-issued shares proposal came with the simultaneous announcement of the retention of a team of (expensive) Perkins Coie lawyers to get it all approved by the SEC.

File your S1s, kids.

They hired the same lawfirm that bitshares guys are using so im sure they can leverage the same work. The fact that a crime happened was probably why they were charged but who would they go after here? Its decentralized.

Btw I think overstock wants to issue the same stocks from ny so they would somehow bring them in (i think) this that is subject to securities regulation. That wouldnt apply here either. Either way its fine and not a reason for it to fail thats for sure.


There are two potential regulatory issues:

1) The entities that issue shares onto the platform very likely need to comply with SEC regs. You can ask Erik Voorhees about that.
2) If the creators of the platform are known/public, aggressive regulatory enforcement could hassle them as well. I'm not saying it makes "moral" sense or whatever, just that it's entirely within the realm of things that can happen in reality.

#1 is a near certainty. #2 is untested, and so just speculation.



Maybe... im not part of the team so I'm just trying to be logical... #1 may or may not be certain.. since again it is not a money transmitter and so I think a new law would have to be put in place for it to happen (not likely in short or medium term).. #2 sure he gets thrown in jail, there are plenty of devs ready to step up... it doesn't stop the system. The hard work is pretty much done anyway.

BTW entities that issue shares (that can be anyone) so you mean EVERYONE who uses it must comply with SEC regs.. yea good luck with that!


You are confused about #1. Money Transmission regulation is distinct from SEC securities-offering regulation.

I'm not saying any of this 100% takes down bitshares or similar systems. Jurisdictional arbitrage will happen, of course. But at the same time, it's naive to think that the SEC and similar bodies in the world's largest markets, will not apply their broadly-written body of regulation to these new platforms. Again, Erik Voorhees experience is a good example. That was a tiny, niche, esoteric offering and the SEC still took enforcement action (~2 years later).




...

#2 doesn't apply. I don't think #2 from your post applies, and I'm going to naively assume that all judges will agree with me.


FTFY

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
Pages: « 1 ... 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 [708] 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!