my own server.  It's not my email service, support finally contacted me yesterday and approved my email manually.  I checked all spam and associated filters, but I never got the email from the system.  Several others have reported similar experiences.

I'm disappointed, because I wanted to increase my holdings, and I already own what I want on Havelock. So, because of this glitch, they missed out on selling 10K more shares, and I missed out on making a decent chunk of coin.

The number one reason to stay out of Neo & Bee is the amount of ActiveMining investors that seem to be on board.

Let me explain.
Those guys are so retarded that they will defend to the teeth issuers that are actively scamming them out of their money, even after the two IPOs. They are still defending a company that delivered nothing and has been lying to them for six months.

This kind of attitude is encouraging issuers to hide crucial things; asking for, say, financials, will be received as "trolling", "FUD", whatever retarded thing they come up with. They're not only encouraging scammers, they are creating scammers.

This isn't about liking the "CEO" or the business model. It's about not losing your wealth because profits, if there are any, will be kept from you.

Ken Slaughter thinks his personal debt is more important than all other Weex users and is using his book education in Indian law to personally keep 100+ BTC worth of shares that I have been trying to sell to distribute to WeEx debtors.

what's the size of the first Gen 3 deployment?  will you be mining with it or selling as hardware?  When is the expected date of release of this hardware?

Rage much?

Even if the proposed solutions of colored coins or mastercoin do not directly compete with Havelock, they or some other decentralized system will be run over various marketplaces which will compete with Havelock. There is also the possibility of somebody buying the BTCT code and starting up another exchange, or somebody writing up new code or whatever. The barrier to entry in this space is very low, companies will list at the exchange that gives them the best combination of price, exposure, and security.

I think when they get figured out, they will become a competitor to exchanges.  Even direct shares, as they are now, is a competition to exchanges.  How many direct shares of AM are there vs how many are listed on Havelock?  Look at how many shareholders chose to hold on to their shares after BTCT vs moving them to Havelock.  That doesn't show much confidence in Havelock.

These solutions are not ready for wide use, yet, but make no mistake, centralized exchanges are not what the market is currently requesting.

I think that without trading people are left in the dark regarding the market value of this share. Maybe this is intentional and they will not enable trading during the IPO. Anyway, I think that it would be fair if they at least stated when trading will start.

... Talking some intellectually lazy people into forking over a few pittances so as to fund whatever personal project has nothing to do with investing, nor is it particularly a good thing for anyone involved. It doesn't belong in Bitcoin. ...

it's not either or.  plenty of other businesses that are much larger than NeoBee have provided these solutions for their shareholders.

don't give us false choices and act like you can't provide an easy way for shareholders to manage shares.  Not only is it disrespectful to your shareholders who have invested millions of Euros with you, it's a weak excuse for you (or your share management team) not planning ahead.

The shareholders did not choose the exchanges you listed on, you did.  Therefore, you are responsible for the shortcomings, not us.  And we certainly should not have to bear the costs of you figuring out how to keep track of shares. That's the price you pay for not doing this in the beginning.

It shouldn't take "all of your efforts" to provide a public list of shareholders or a direct shares solution.  In fact, it should save considerable amount of time for everyone involved, especially since we hear that it costs .5 btc to migrate shares that are worth .002 btc.  

If you can't dedicate the time required to address the needs of your shareholders, then you have no business running a company in this sector, and you certainly have no business requesting investor funds.

This bullshit with Friedcat revealing important plans to some people before telling the rest of the shareholders is just unacceptable. I'm selling my shares, fuck this. 

What is your plan in case Havelock comes out and says US investors are no longer welcome? At the moment all Havelock IPOs are frozen and people are still waiting for news from them.

I'm pretty sure that at least 50% of your shareholder are US investors if not more.

https://Ice-dice.com is considering offering an IPO to raise some fund for the bankroll and hire some marketing to grow the site. The site launched 3 weeks ago and it's been growing steadily with good feedbacks from both users and investors. Now we are thinking of taking it to the next step and doing an IPO. I'm not familiar with the way bitcoin companies IPO, can someone send me some info on how it's done?

Some of my questions are:
- How do we issue shares to sell?
- How do we keep track of who has how many shares?
- How do we pay dividends?
- How do we buy back shares?
- How do we list on bitcoin stock exchanges?
- What is a good bitcoin stock exchange?
- What are some of the pros and cons of IPO and selling shares?

You can't kill code that is open source. The GPL or MIT license would guarantee it survives forever. You cannot go to prison for writing code.
The only reason his exchange is shut down is because it's hosted in the USA. Why doesn't he just refuse to sell to any company in the USA? It's an unlicensed exchange which means it's just as illegal to run as before so nothing changes at all really. I don't see how a region block provides any protection. Of course whoever runs the exchange shouldn't solicit US customers but if they adopt KYC but are still unlicensed then what is the point?

Bitfunder shares still aren't considered real but they are trying to do this KYC type stuff?
Ultimately only a decentralized exchange will be immune to being shut down. Any governments police can raid any of these exchanges if they even have the hint that people used it for money laundering. Silk Road arrests could trigger a global crack down on all of these exchanges in an attempt to track tainted coins and it wouldn't have to be done under the regulatory laws but could be done under the criminal laws or even under the three letter agency anti-terror finance laws. In any case if they want to shut down unlicensed exchanges they will and no amount of blocking US customers will prevent it.

My guess? Because Silk Road was run by an American and Dread Pirate Roberts was an American the following investigations will probably be run by the FBI and DEA. But this doesn't mean that there aren't mutual legal assistance treaties and other mechanisms to allow local three letter agencies in every country to get involved. In that case the governments would be able to send national security letters, conduct anti-terrorist investigations, and then it does make sense to block US customers in order to avoid impeding on an ongoing investigation.

The problem is if that is all the result of the Silk Road investigation then something must be done technologically to allow law enforcement to do their investigations without disrupting the entire Bitcoin economy and having multiple sites shut down. There might be a very important investigation going on or several and the feds might not even care about btct or Bitfunder. It could have been that some bad guys happened to set up scams or use those exchanges to invest their drug money. That is a legitimate and real possibility which would explain all of this and fit in with the timing. If that is the case then moving to Havelock probably will not be a long term solution for US investors which is why I never recommended moving to Havelock for any other reason than to buy time until Havelock shuts down as well.

The conclusion to all this is we will need to make a choice as a community about what we want. Do we want anonymity in which case Bitcoin will probably never be able to have much growth, and in which case the price of coins will never be $20,000 a coin, but people will be able to use Bitcoins to buy drugs. Or do we want to have a Bitcoin which actually goes legitimate and which can be used as a currency, which can someday be $20,000 a coin or more, and which we can all build legitimate businesses around?

Due to money laundering laws and the real threat of terrorist financing we will not be able to have both. Developers are ultimately going to be made to pick one side or the other and there will either be a fork at some point or Bitcoin developers will choose one path or the other. At this point it seems gmaxwell and some other Bitcoin developers are choosing the path of anonymity. For that reason and as a result of that choice, the economic effects will be felt as the feds do everything in their power to discourage that.

I had a discussion with gmaxwell on the coinjoin thread. I made the case that the community is going to have to become more responsible and technologically regulate itself to avoid mass arrests. I'd rather deal with technological features like tainted coins with blacklists or KYC than mass arrests, shut downs, etc. Don't get me wrong there probably will be a coin which has anonymity, I just don't think that cryptocurrency will be the one to become the mainstream cryptocurrency. I don't think anonymity is necessary for privacy. I do think records should be kept either by the users themselves or on the blockchain. But I also don't think that corporations should know what books we buy or what we do with our money.

The issue of stolen coins, money laundering, coin taint, record keeping, these are all technological issues which can be solved in a way which could provide more privacy than Paypal and credit cards but not be completely anonymous. I have no clue how to strike the balance, and I know that currently the blockchain isn't anywhere near private enough, but I also know that it shouldn't be a complete black box of a blockchain where no one can determine what goes on because if some really bad event happens or if governments were to exploit this technology against us then we would want some way to be able to follow the money even if its not easy or cheap to do. Ultimately we are either all going to end up keeping records on our transactions in exchange for having true privacy and anonymity, or we will let the blockchain keep a public record of every transaction. If you see any other way let me know but I think we are at a fork in the road.

It's not going to happen.

There aren't rules in place for Bitcoin already and there isn't anyone rich enough presently involved in Bitcoin who has the huge amounts of money necessary for such a venture. If you are going to have an SEC approved exchange, you need the money required to comply with all the regulations and fees.


The answer is to make a distributed stock exchange, that is decentralized, anonymous and peer-to-peer much like Bitcoin itself. It isn't even really that hard, and I have been working on some ideas for one in my free time and I know I'm not the only one.