Quote from: SynereoCommunity on May 04, 2016, 04:05:42 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on May 01, 2016, 11:06:40 PM

Quote from: SynereoCommunity on May 01, 2016, 07:44:20 PM

Alt currencies are not investments in the eyes of existing law anyway.

With that strawman statement which does not address the points of the Howey test, you obviously do not comprehend the thread that was provided to you. You probably didn't even read it or read it carefully.
>>
There is nothing slander nor libel in demanding proper disclosure with all the technical details explained so that laymen investors can evaluate if this AMP token is a worthwhile investment.

Notice how when you start with the fact that AMPs are not an investment, you don't have an argument?

An AMPs investment security that is not "worthwhile" is still an investment security.

I'll be quoting this in the thread for future SEC investigations since you are disingenuously misrepresenting the facts to intentionally promote an unregistered investment security to n00b USA investors on this forum.

Quote from: SynereoCommunity on May 04, 2016, 04:05:42 AM

The technical details have been made available anyway, and every week, you have a chance at asking Greg whatever question you want.

Provide a link to all the complete written specifications written in terminology and explanation that non-process calculi experts can analyze. This has not been provided.

Handwaving in video Hangouts is irrelevant and is the way you disingenuously mislead the n00bs speculators here.

Face it dude, you aren't going to win a debate about truth with me, because I am on the right side of truth and you are not. And I am smart enough to unweave your manipulative words.

Quote from: SynereoCommunity on May 04, 2016, 04:05:42 AM

y it's someone else's fault that you haven't learned.

Quote from: SynereoCommunity on May 01, 2016, 07:44:20 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on April 18, 2016, 05:56:41 PM

It has been in commercial operation for a couple years.

You are referring to components of the system such as Special K or Microsoft's use of process calculi, but the devil is in the details. This usage of some components of his research has no bearing on whether any of this is applicable to Synereo.

Of course it has bearing, it's a content delivery network - that's what it does. They are not simply components, they are the foundation, and the tech stack that does the work.

You need to learn at least enough to be able to voice your specific questions, if you have doubts.

Ad hominem attacks are not going to get you there.

I mean of course in the context of my prior comments that SpecialK may have no bearing on whether this Synereo system as a whole will function without game theory failure as a whole. One can't apply what is true about a component as evidence of what is true about an amalgamation of components w.r.t. to game theory. Duh!

There is nothing ad hominem in my statements. I speak only to the facts (and the lack of written non-technobabble, non-handwaving facts providers by Synereo) of the matter.