Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 27 results by Cannabisdreams
Re: [ANN] Signatum - New Algorithm - Fair Launch - No Premine - Cryptopia
Whatever happened in burst I honestly could care less. Crowetic paid an exchange bounty when no one else stood up and I don't know him except word of mouth. Anyone who puts time and money into a project they can't be bad so you got my vote.
I wouldnt trust him. A quick google search shows he's shady AF, there's tons of stuff.
https://www.burstnation.com/wbb/index.php?thread/3093-jason-crowe-aka-crowetic-of-crowetic-llc-and-his-exit-scam-the-traitors-who-supp/
https://www.burstnation.com/wbb/index.php?thread/2340-exposed-crowetic-bragging-about-his-involvement-ddos-attacking-pool-burstmining/
https://forums.burst-team.us/topic/5310/crowetic-the-leader
Do Not .... Do Not ... bring that shit over here. If you are going to read those links, read them all, do not fall for the insanity, go back MONTHS and read them all As a burst miner and community member I have read them all and I lived through the past few months of it. I can say without a single doubt that crowetic went above and beyond for Burst, he paid out of pocket when funds were stolen, he provided bonus' to help out new pools, he dedicated himself full time to that project and only left after it was crystal clear that circumstances prevented any further growth of that coin. While I wish them the best of luck over at BN, I hope I never ever hear their names or their hateful videos, discord spam, forum lies etc., again... ever.
Every action taken by crowetic during that time was above board and handled with as much maturity as the situation would allow. F@%& Burst and their forked all to hell network.
On to better projects. As a new miner of Sigt and an active forum troll, I'd be thrilled to have Crowetic on this project as a full time member.
I can also confirm that he has been no where near burst or the forums for several weeks. He fairly and properly severed all ties as far as I know.
What Does the SEC Report Imply for the Crypto Community?
I posted this elsewhere but think it more properly belongs here:
An analysis of the SEC Report, released on July 25, 2017, By a non-lawyer community member.
On, July 25, 2017, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)released their investigative report regarding The DAO initial coin offering (ICO)which was launched in April, 2016, and was subsequently hacked during the ICO sale. The most attention grabbing assertion in this report is that DAO Tokens were defined as securities, and are therefore subject to the laws and regulations of the SEC. Furthermore, the report states that ICO issuers as well as investors are required to register with the SEC, unless an exemption applies.
What does this mean? Should we all start dumping our ETH tokens on the nearest exchange and wipe our hard drives? No, probably not. It is important during these fast moving and ever changing times to keep a clear head and examine the real world impact that this report will have on the average user and token issuer. I will attempt to break down each section of the SECs report and provide you with a summary of their assertions and conclusions. I am not an attorney, I am not a financial adviser, I am not giving anyone advice in relation to anything. My purpose is to increase community awareness and assist those who have trouble understanding the convoluted legal jargon.
First, please understand that this is an investigative report, nothing more. This is not a law nor is it a proposed law. This is a legal opinion offered by a government agency. While it may be very influential in developing future legal arguments and regulation enforcement in the United States, it is simply an opinion at this point. Further clarification and modification through legal challenges will most certainly follow in the months and years to come.
A .pdf of the SEC Investigation Report can be found here: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf
In section I, paragraph four, the SEC states as follows:
The investigation raised questions regarding the application of the U.S. federal securities laws to the offer and sale of DAO Tokens, including the threshold question whether DAO Tokens are securities. Based on the investigation, and under the facts presented, the Commission has determined that DAO Tokens are securities under the Securities Act of 1933.
The SEC is basing its determination that DAO tokens are securities on the following factors which I have listed numerically for ease of reference:
1. Foundational Principles of the Securities Laws Apply to Virtual Organizations or Capital Raising Entities Making Use of Distributed Ledger Technology
2. Those who Invested Money in The DAO
3. With a Reasonable Expectation of Profits
4. Derived from the Managerial Efforts of Others
a. The Efforts of Slock.it, Slock.its Co-Founders, and The DAOs Curators Were Essential to the Enterprise
b. DAO Token Holders Voting Rights Were Limited
The first factor asserts that SEC laws apply to blockchain technology and virtual organizations because under the Securities and Exchange Act a security includes an investment contract. This argument certainly works for some currencies and assets as they are openly based on smart contracts among other similar configurations. Whether or not this would apply to all cryptocurrencies is debatable. The SEC acknowledges in other areas of their report that these determinations should be taken on a case by case basis and include multiple factors.
The SECs second argument is that members of the DAO invested money. In order to perfect an investment contract, there must be an exchange of money from investors. They assert that the term money does not have to mean cash. The SEC cites several cases where it was held that virtual currency, namely bitcoin, can be used to create an investment contract. Conversely,it has not been established that simply investing in, or contributing to, a community project would be subject to this section. There is room for argument on this premise that a specific cryptocurrency project may not fall under this section.
The third factor for determining whether a token or currency meets the definition of a security is that investors have a reasonable expectation of profits. In the case of the DAO, there were numerous marketing campaigns, whitepapers, and forum posts promising continual returns on investment. Not all crypto currencies are launched in this way and not all promise a return from monetary gains. Based on this,community members may be able to tailor their projects in certain ways to negate this factor.
Finally, the SEC asserts that securities are investment gains derived from the managerial efforts of others. This is where things can get really interesting and tricky for other cryptocurrency projects. The DAO was set up in a very centralized way. As the SEC pointed out, the founders and curators of the DAO were essential to its enterprise. The voting rights of investors were limited at best, and just for show at worst. When the DAO hack occurred, investors had no control or legal standing to resolve the issue themselves and had to turn to the founders and curators for a solution. In this way, the DAO was certainly managing the enterprise with little to no input from investors. Projects that are truly decentralized, where voting and new implementations are community based or automated, could potentially avoid meeting this factor.
In summary as to whether a crypto project is or is not a security, this report simply outlines the criteria they used to determine whether or not the DAO should be considered a security. It offers guidelines for future actions and regulation but does not change existing law. While there are likely to be upcoming challenges on this issue,the courts of law may not accept the SECs argument in its entirety. For now, it is best to seek the advice of an attorney specializing in virtual assets and/or securities trading in regard to how this report may affect you and our projects in the future.
I hope you found this information helpful. I will be following up with an analysis of the exemptions allowed under the Securities and Exchanges Act and how those may or may not apply to cryptocurrency projects.
Dated: July 25, 2017
An analysis of the SEC Report, released on July 25, 2017, By a non-lawyer community member.
On, July 25, 2017, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)released their investigative report regarding The DAO initial coin offering (ICO)which was launched in April, 2016, and was subsequently hacked during the ICO sale. The most attention grabbing assertion in this report is that DAO Tokens were defined as securities, and are therefore subject to the laws and regulations of the SEC. Furthermore, the report states that ICO issuers as well as investors are required to register with the SEC, unless an exemption applies.
What does this mean? Should we all start dumping our ETH tokens on the nearest exchange and wipe our hard drives? No, probably not. It is important during these fast moving and ever changing times to keep a clear head and examine the real world impact that this report will have on the average user and token issuer. I will attempt to break down each section of the SECs report and provide you with a summary of their assertions and conclusions. I am not an attorney, I am not a financial adviser, I am not giving anyone advice in relation to anything. My purpose is to increase community awareness and assist those who have trouble understanding the convoluted legal jargon.
First, please understand that this is an investigative report, nothing more. This is not a law nor is it a proposed law. This is a legal opinion offered by a government agency. While it may be very influential in developing future legal arguments and regulation enforcement in the United States, it is simply an opinion at this point. Further clarification and modification through legal challenges will most certainly follow in the months and years to come.
A .pdf of the SEC Investigation Report can be found here: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf
In section I, paragraph four, the SEC states as follows:
The investigation raised questions regarding the application of the U.S. federal securities laws to the offer and sale of DAO Tokens, including the threshold question whether DAO Tokens are securities. Based on the investigation, and under the facts presented, the Commission has determined that DAO Tokens are securities under the Securities Act of 1933.
The SEC is basing its determination that DAO tokens are securities on the following factors which I have listed numerically for ease of reference:
1. Foundational Principles of the Securities Laws Apply to Virtual Organizations or Capital Raising Entities Making Use of Distributed Ledger Technology
2. Those who Invested Money in The DAO
3. With a Reasonable Expectation of Profits
4. Derived from the Managerial Efforts of Others
a. The Efforts of Slock.it, Slock.its Co-Founders, and The DAOs Curators Were Essential to the Enterprise
b. DAO Token Holders Voting Rights Were Limited
The first factor asserts that SEC laws apply to blockchain technology and virtual organizations because under the Securities and Exchange Act a security includes an investment contract. This argument certainly works for some currencies and assets as they are openly based on smart contracts among other similar configurations. Whether or not this would apply to all cryptocurrencies is debatable. The SEC acknowledges in other areas of their report that these determinations should be taken on a case by case basis and include multiple factors.
The SECs second argument is that members of the DAO invested money. In order to perfect an investment contract, there must be an exchange of money from investors. They assert that the term money does not have to mean cash. The SEC cites several cases where it was held that virtual currency, namely bitcoin, can be used to create an investment contract. Conversely,it has not been established that simply investing in, or contributing to, a community project would be subject to this section. There is room for argument on this premise that a specific cryptocurrency project may not fall under this section.
The third factor for determining whether a token or currency meets the definition of a security is that investors have a reasonable expectation of profits. In the case of the DAO, there were numerous marketing campaigns, whitepapers, and forum posts promising continual returns on investment. Not all crypto currencies are launched in this way and not all promise a return from monetary gains. Based on this,community members may be able to tailor their projects in certain ways to negate this factor.
Finally, the SEC asserts that securities are investment gains derived from the managerial efforts of others. This is where things can get really interesting and tricky for other cryptocurrency projects. The DAO was set up in a very centralized way. As the SEC pointed out, the founders and curators of the DAO were essential to its enterprise. The voting rights of investors were limited at best, and just for show at worst. When the DAO hack occurred, investors had no control or legal standing to resolve the issue themselves and had to turn to the founders and curators for a solution. In this way, the DAO was certainly managing the enterprise with little to no input from investors. Projects that are truly decentralized, where voting and new implementations are community based or automated, could potentially avoid meeting this factor.
In summary as to whether a crypto project is or is not a security, this report simply outlines the criteria they used to determine whether or not the DAO should be considered a security. It offers guidelines for future actions and regulation but does not change existing law. While there are likely to be upcoming challenges on this issue,the courts of law may not accept the SECs argument in its entirety. For now, it is best to seek the advice of an attorney specializing in virtual assets and/or securities trading in regard to how this report may affect you and our projects in the future.
I hope you found this information helpful. I will be following up with an analysis of the exemptions allowed under the Securities and Exchanges Act and how those may or may not apply to cryptocurrency projects.
Dated: July 25, 2017
What Does the SEC Report Imply for the Crypto Community?
What Does the SEC Report Imply for the Crypto Community?
An analysis of the SEC Report, released on July 25, 2017, By a non-lawyer community member.
On, July 25, 2017, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)released their investigative report regarding The DAO initial coin offering (ICO)which was launched in April, 2016, and was subsequently hacked during the ICO sale. The most attention grabbing assertion in this report is that DAO Tokens were defined as securities, and are therefore subject to the laws and regulations of the SEC. Furthermore, the report states that ICO issuers as well as investors are required to register with the SEC, unless an exemption applies.
What does this mean? Should we all start dumping our ETH tokens on the nearest exchange and wipe our hard drives? No, probably not. It is important during these fast moving and ever changing times to keep a clear head and examine the real world impact that this report will have on the average user and token issuer. I will attempt to break down each section of the SECs report and provide you with a summary of their assertions and conclusions. I am not an attorney, I am not a financial adviser, I am not giving anyone advice in relation to anything. My purpose is to increase community awareness and assist those who have trouble understanding the convoluted legal jargon.
First, please understand that this is an investigative report, nothing more. This is not a law nor is it a proposed law. This is a legal opinion offered by a government agency. While it may be very influential in developing future legal arguments and regulation enforcement in the United States, it is simply an opinion at this point. Further clarification and modification through legal challenges will most certainly follow in the months and years to come.
A .pdf of the SEC Investigation Report can be found here: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf
In section I, paragraph four, the SEC states as follows:
The investigation raised questions regarding the application of the U.S. federal securities laws to the offer and sale of DAO Tokens, including the threshold question whether DAO Tokens are securities. Based on the investigation, and under the facts presented, the Commission has determined that DAO Tokens are securities under the Securities Act of 1933.
The SEC is basing its determination that DAO tokens are securities on the following factors which I have listed numerically for ease of reference:
1. Foundational Principles of the Securities Laws Apply to Virtual Organizations or Capital Raising Entities Making Use of Distributed Ledger Technology
2. Those who Invested Money in The DAO
3. With a Reasonable Expectation of Profits
4. Derived from the Managerial Efforts of Others
a. The Efforts of Slock.it, Slock.its Co-Founders, and The DAOs Curators Were Essential to the Enterprise
b. DAO Token Holders Voting Rights Were Limited
The first factor asserts that SEC laws apply to blockchain technology and virtual organizations because under the Securities and Exchange Act a security includes an investment contract. This argument certainly works for some currencies and assets as they are openly based on smart contracts among other similar configurations. Whether or not this would apply to all cryptocurrencies is debatable. The SEC acknowledges in other areas of their report that these determinations should be taken on a case by case basis and include multiple factors.
The SECs second argument is that members of the DAO invested money. In order to perfect an investment contract, there must be an exchange of money from investors. They assert that the term money does not have to mean cash. The SEC cites several cases where it was held that virtual currency, namely, bitcoin, can be used to create an investment contract. Conversely,it has not been established that simply investing in, or contributing to, a community project would be subject to this section. There is room for argument on this premise that a specific cryptocurrency project may not fall under this section.
The third factor for determining whether a token or currency meets the definition of a security is that investors have a reasonable expectation of profits. In the case of the DAO, there were numerous marketing campaigns, whitepapers, and forum posts promising continual returns on investment. Not all cryptocurrencies are launched in this way and not all promise a return from monetary gains. Based on this,community members may be able to tailor their projects in certain ways to negate this factor.
Finally, the SEC asserts that securities are investment gains derived from the managerial efforts of others. This is where things can get really interesting and tricky for other cryptocurrency projects. The DAO was set up in a very centralized way. As the SEC pointed out, the founders and curators of the DAO were essential to its enterprise. The voting rights of investors were limited at best, and just for show at worst. When the DAO hack occurred, investors had no control or legal standing to resolve the issue themselves and had to turn to the founders and curators for a solution. In this way, the DAO was certainly managing the enterprise with little to no input from investors. Projects that are truly decentralized, where voting and new implementations are community based or automated, could potentially avoid meeting this factor.
In summary as to whether a crypto project is or is not a security, this report simply outlines the criteria they used to determine whether or not the DAO should be considered a security. It offers guidelines for future actions and regulation but does not change existing law. While there are likely to be upcoming challenges on this issue,the courts of law may not accept the SECs argument in its entirety. For now, it is best to seek the advice of an attorney specializing in virtual assets and/or securities trading in regard to how this report may affect you and our projects in the future.
I hope you found this information helpful. I will be following up with an analysis of the exemptions allowed under the Securities and Exchanges Act and how those may or may not apply to cryptocurrency projects.
Dated: July 25, 2017
Re: [ANN] Signatum - New Algorithm - Fair Launch - No Premine - Cryptopia
Did I see the name Crowetic in the OP? The same one from Burst coin? Does he have a hand in this coin?
Did you find the answer to this? If @Crowetic is involved I'll buy more! I think he's great and completely understood why he felt the need to walk away from Burst. Any project he works on in the future is one I'd be happy to support.
Re: [ANN] FUCKTOKEN - Proof of Fuck Given [FUCK] - Reddit Tipbot Integration
I am so happy to see interest growing by the hour for this token! The guy who sent the coindash 'hacker' 1 FUCK is awesome and should receive a bounty for bringing FuckTokens to the attention of the thousands of people who looked up that wallet address. FUCKING BRILLIANT!
anyone else using the block factory and seeing their hash rates much different than what they are actually mining?
today I'm showing 450-560 KH/s on block factory and my hash rates are showing 910+ KH/s. Even my accepted shares are at that level. I am getting nothing lower than 900. I wasn't having this issue with the site until today. Just curious is anyone else is seeing this
today I'm showing 450-560 KH/s on block factory and my hash rates are showing 910+ KH/s. Even my accepted shares are at that level. I am getting nothing lower than 900. I wasn't having this issue with the site until today. Just curious is anyone else is seeing this
Ive been using The Blocks Factory for DGB and FTC for a couple of months now. yes, the hashrates on the site are not accurate but over 24 hours seems to work out. I love this pool, i can see exactly what my payout is per block and every time I've needed to do an instant cash out, the coins go out immediately.
I'm mining GUN on a GTX 750ti (old but super efficient and i didn't have to buy)
Re: [ANN] Denarius [DNR] - NEW "Tribus" PoW Algo >> PoW/PoS Hybrid >> Satoshi Core
Re: [ANN] Denarius [DNR] - NEW "Tribus" PoW Algo >> PoW/PoS Hybrid >> Satoshi Core
I am very interested in this coin. I just started mining it today and all is going smoothly. This algo seems to run a lot cooler on my gpu than some others so I'm already happy about that.
Question on the fast confirms: I can testify that the transaction times are super fast, within seconds. However, More confirms = more data = more blocks = higher storage requirements over short periods and a lack of scalability because of it.
How has this been addressed with DNR?
Question on the fast confirms: I can testify that the transaction times are super fast, within seconds. However, More confirms = more data = more blocks = higher storage requirements over short periods and a lack of scalability because of it.
How has this been addressed with DNR?
Re: [ANN][PRE-ICO] *FUCK [ETH][BANGBANG] | Small-Cap Pre-Sale
I've created a myetherwallet and added FUCK as a custom token so I'm all set just as soon as coinbase gets over its current scammy issues. I will pm you, thank you! I give a FUCK!
Re: [ANN][PRE-ICO] *FUCK [ETH][BANGBANG] | Small-Cap Pre-Sale
Minor Service Outage: Our team is currently investigating an issue with Ethereum withdrawals. All recent or newly sent ETH transactions may remain in the pending state longer than expected. - Coinbase.
I am trying but no fucks were given by coinbase!
I am trying but no fucks were given by coinbase!
So what happens if you are an idiot and didn't read Bittex's 'minimum deposit' bullshit correctly? I sent them 10USD in ETH, which was far below their minimum. Is my money gone? Is there anyway to get it back? They say send them more money.... So I'd need to send them another 30 USD to get it up to the min deposit... then can I take it all back out? or is that 40USD/0.1 ETH just theirs forever now? I can't get them to answer this question, I keep getting automated emails....
I get that I made the mistake but they should not have even accepted the deposit if it did not meet their minimum. I feel like I was robbed.
I get that I made the mistake but they should not have even accepted the deposit if it did not meet their minimum. I feel like I was robbed.
Re: [ANN] Ħ [HODL] 5% Interest. No Staking Req. Term Deposits 10%. Solo Mining.
If you are having problems getting your miner to sync: DO NOT DOWNLOAD the blockchain from the link on the first page. I have no idea why, but that file is causing problems and I can't imagine why a user supplied download link from a couple years ago has not been removed after reports of problems. (*I see that it has been removed, thank you!
I had to delete every file that even looked like a hodl file except the wallet.dat (major mistake to delete that file since I haven't found a way to recover it and lost the first coins I mined). I had to move that to my desktop, delete the entire hodlcoin folder in the appdata file and the original location you put the exe file. That wallet fix thingy did not work no matter how many ways I tried or how angry I got at it. The only thing that worked was deleting absolutely everything, downloading the Hodlcoin 3.0.0 zip file all over again and writing a new bat file (probably not necessary but who knows). Lastly, put the wallet.bat file back where it belongs and launch.
It took HOURS to download the blockchain (as expected) and during that time the cmd window showed errors and block problems...that is NORMAL, its shutting down stale/closed nodes and looking for others.. .DO NOT close the window until your wallet shows fully synced and when you put your mouse over the little icon at the bottom right, the block number matches the block the network is on (from the block explorer website).
It would be immensely helpful to have someone around to answer newcomer questions. I'm sure there were/are plenty of new guys who didn't bother bitching on this forum and just moved on.
I had to delete every file that even looked like a hodl file except the wallet.dat (major mistake to delete that file since I haven't found a way to recover it and lost the first coins I mined). I had to move that to my desktop, delete the entire hodlcoin folder in the appdata file and the original location you put the exe file. That wallet fix thingy did not work no matter how many ways I tried or how angry I got at it. The only thing that worked was deleting absolutely everything, downloading the Hodlcoin 3.0.0 zip file all over again and writing a new bat file (probably not necessary but who knows). Lastly, put the wallet.bat file back where it belongs and launch.
It took HOURS to download the blockchain (as expected) and during that time the cmd window showed errors and block problems...that is NORMAL, its shutting down stale/closed nodes and looking for others.. .DO NOT close the window until your wallet shows fully synced and when you put your mouse over the little icon at the bottom right, the block number matches the block the network is on (from the block explorer website).
It would be immensely helpful to have someone around to answer newcomer questions. I'm sure there were/are plenty of new guys who didn't bother bitching on this forum and just moved on.
Re: [ANN] Ħ [HODL] 5% Interest. No Staking Req. Term Deposits 10%. Solo Mining.
@nomadicmad
You were correct. the problem started when i downloaded that blockchain from the first page download link AFTER this problem occurred. My miner and both wallets were working fine. The problems started for me when I downloaded that shit... and attempted to fix something that was never broken on my end..so... THANKS FOR THAT. (a sincere thank you to nomadic to actually figuring this out)
I was going to hang in there for another week or two and see how it went but .... WAY TOO MUCH shady going on here. Maybe you guys are legit but it doesn't appear that way from the outside. Funny how these 'issues' are never in favor of the miners. Is there a dev team behind this or are we talking one guy part time on the weekends?
I had a similar problem, my wallet client was showing 'synced' but wasn't actually at the correct block height... but deleting my blockchain data and starting from scratch worked for me. My mined coins finally appeared upon a proper sync.
I think my problem had something to do with using one of the blockchain download links from the first post. Maybe those should be updated or removed if they are indeed part of the problem.
I think my problem had something to do with using one of the blockchain download links from the first post. Maybe those should be updated or removed if they are indeed part of the problem.
You were correct. the problem started when i downloaded that blockchain from the first page download link AFTER this problem occurred. My miner and both wallets were working fine. The problems started for me when I downloaded that shit... and attempted to fix something that was never broken on my end..so... THANKS FOR THAT. (a sincere thank you to nomadic to actually figuring this out)
I was going to hang in there for another week or two and see how it went but .... WAY TOO MUCH shady going on here. Maybe you guys are legit but it doesn't appear that way from the outside. Funny how these 'issues' are never in favor of the miners. Is there a dev team behind this or are we talking one guy part time on the weekends?