CFSCOIN - now hiring - 150,000 sharedrop on CFSGOLD - giveaway inside :D

[pseudoscops]

bts: pseudoscops

Thanks Rune!

[roadscape]

thanks!

Excited to see where this goes

[Rune]

Can you elaborate more on those 'buy & burn bots'? I do not remember anything about them in your previous papers. I guess they are kind of like the buy-back that Play DAC uses for their artists shares. But that is just a guess.

bts: jshow

Well, I haven't really fully thought it through yet. But I think the best way to steadily increase the price of CFSCOIN through the income from the market making operations, will be to have a market making bot that basically does regular market making of CFSCOIN/USD, but then burns 5% of all CFSCOIN it holds every 24 hours. This would slowly reduce the supply of CFSCOIN while ensuring the bot only buys it at favorable prices, hopefully creating a relatively steady price increase/return over time for CFSCOIN.

It also occured to me that the entirety of the 30% from CFS assets could be used only to prop up the CFSCOIN market, and then all salary and payments could be done by inflating new CFSCOIN rather than using income. This could perhaps help with decentralization since the rights to inflate can be easier to control through voting.

The most important thing is that people who buy our UIA's should not be at any risk of getting their funds seized if me or someone else gets targeted.

This is going to be difficult to manage considering your operations consist of doing market making on outside exchanges. It is one thing to use multisig to protect the UIA issuer/manager from dumping a bunch of newly issued CFSAssets or CFSCOIN, but the thing that provides most of the value to CFSAssets are the cryptocurrency assets (BTC and BitAssets) that are being held by the centralized exchanges. Some of the value of CFSAssets and all of the value of CFSCOIN comes from speculation of future profits which could in theory continue without current employees if the operation was sufficiently decentralized and the BTC and BitAssets were secure.

If your future operations only consisted of market making on the BitShares blockchain, then you could (in future versions of BitShares) likely decentralize control of the BitAssets and Gateway-IOUs to smart contracts that respect the wishes of the CFSAsset and CFSCOIN stakeholders. You would still have multisig managers (likely threshold signatures for maximum decentralization to transaction size ratio) controlling the movement of those funds and placing/canceling the bid and ask orders. You would want to also hedge against volatility of any of the gateway assets (like GATEBTC, where the BTC reserves can itself be controlled in a reasonably decentralized way using multisig and/or threshold signatures) using shorts (collateralized by BitAssets) on the BitShares blockchain, where those short positions were also ultimately controlled by smart contracts (again this is a far off future version of BitShares I am talking about). You would have multisig managers controlling these assets and positions regularly (with certain programmed limits, like restricting how much money can be transferred to addresses/balances not controlled by the smart contract within a certain time window without explicit stakeholder approval, and restricting the prices allowed for the bid/ask orders within some percentage range of the price feed), but the managers or a quorum of the stakeholders could always revoke the control of the current managers if it became necessary. Then in those cases the stakeholders could find another group of managers to resume operations and elect if they can reach consensus on that slate with the necessary quorum of stakeholders.

But as long as you need to keep the cryptocurrency that you are doing market making with on a centralized exchange (which you will need to do for quite a while), that becomes a weak chain in the link in which authorities could seize those assets for whatever reason.

The counterparty risk from custodians will never disappear, however I hope it will be possible to have custodians be anonymous, yet trusted, so they can hold customer funds and trade them on centralized exchanges but cannot be targeted for seizure, or can even be detected by the exchange itself as anything other than private traders, even if CFS is declared illegal. The biggest issue with this (in addition to the anonymous trust) is that we won't be able to utilize Cryptohedge market maker discounts for the anonymous custodians, and those market maker discounts are a major part of the business model.

[xiahui135]

bts:  huge

[molisa86]

nice work.

BTS: lisa86

[clayop]

Cool!
BTS: clayop

[wesphily]

"(since most people understand that a coin does not confer any legal rights or responsibilities)."

This is not a true statement. Crypto currency is considered property. People have the right of ownership which is a legal right It is also a tax liability which is a responsibility
You also need to be very careful with the words you use. If ownership of a coin is supposed to represent ownership in a company similar to a share/security then it will be treated legally that way implicitly. Doesn't matter if there is a document or not. Really, it is worse if you don't have documents because a malicisous person could utilize this fact to black mail you.

All of this is assuming that CFS is a legal entity. (LLC/s-corp/c-corp/ect...) If it only exists in crypto technology and not on a document then I'm not sure how it will be treated since it isn't a legal company. I got road blocked on this when trying to utilize bitshares for Real Estate. A crypto company does not have the ability to own real property. (real property = real estate) There is too much red tape for a small timer like me to use bitshares for a legal company that can own real property.

I'm glad to get some input on this.

Cryptohedge is a DAC and will only ever exist on the bitshares blockchain and owning CFSCOIN does not give you anything other than owning CFSCOIN. For now, CFSCOIN is backed purely by the reputation of Riverhead and me (i.e. it will have value to people who believe we are going to do with it what we have said we plan to do with it).

My vision for how it will end up in its final decentralized "true DAC state" is where the only way it can interface with the real world is through contract-free compensation of employees (delegate style), and reputation based custodianship of client funds. The idea is to create a web of trust that starts out with me and riverhead and expands to include more employees, and could eventually potentially include trusted anonymous employees (trustable, yet untargetable by LE). The DAC should ultimately be 100% controlled by voting done by CFSCOIN holders, and the counterparty exposure that CFSGOLD and other assets get should be moved from Riverhead and me onto the CFSCOIN voters as a whole (through voting controlled smart contracts somehow ).

You are safe for now. If bitshares fulfills what it says it wants to then this will change. You'll have to adapt. I would not be surprised if the SEC considered the act of holding shares and having decision making power makes the property a security and the investors limited partners. Although it would not be a documented company it could be seen legally as acting like one which would put it in SEC court.

Again, you are probably safe for now, BUT I would advise that you save back for a good lawyer.

Yeah, I agree that it's pretty certain that I, personally, will be targeted for illegal fundraising eventually, no matter how much I insist on it being "contract free" or "just a coin". But that will only happen if BTS gets big enough to get noticed and in that case I should be able to afford whatever fine I'm given

The most important thing is that people who buy our UIA's should not be at any risk of getting their funds seized if me or someone else gets targeted.

It'd be more than a fine. Do you have a good lawyer already?

I have, but I have not done any legal consulting regarding issuing cryptocurrency tokens (and doubt I would get much out of it). I think you are assuming I live in the US. Luckily my jurisdiction is Denmark, where laws on finance and especially cryptocurrency are much more lenient. We don't even have to pay any taxes on any cryptocurrency gains! (and taxes are insane in denmark otherwise). Also we have a partially state owned bitcoin exchange

I was assuming. Silly me.

Crypto as a payment for services in US is considered a barter. Barter taxes apply. If you hire somebody in US then you'll need to get more details on how that affects you and the employee.

[jshow5555]

Can you elaborate more on those 'buy & burn bots'? I do not remember anything about them in your previous papers. I guess they are kind of like the buy-back that Play DAC uses for their artists shares. But that is just a guess.

bts: jshow

[arhag]

The most important thing is that people who buy our UIA's should not be at any risk of getting their funds seized if me or someone else gets targeted.

This is going to be difficult to manage considering your operations consist of doing market making on outside exchanges. It is one thing to use multisig to protect the UIA issuer/manager from dumping a bunch of newly issued CFSAssets or CFSCOIN, but the thing that provides most of the value to CFSAssets are the cryptocurrency assets (BTC and BitAssets) that are being held by the centralized exchanges. Some of the value of CFSAssets and all of the value of CFSCOIN comes from speculation of future profits which could in theory continue without current employees if the operation was sufficiently decentralized and the BTC and BitAssets were secure.

If your future operations only consisted of market making on the BitShares blockchain, then you could (in future versions of BitShares) likely decentralize control of the BitAssets and Gateway-IOUs to smart contracts that respect the wishes of the CFSAsset and CFSCOIN stakeholders. You would still have multisig managers (likely threshold signatures for maximum decentralization to transaction size ratio) controlling the movement of those funds and placing/canceling the bid and ask orders. You would want to also hedge against volatility of any of the gateway assets (like GATEBTC, where the BTC reserves can itself be controlled in a reasonably decentralized way using multisig and/or threshold signatures) using shorts (collateralized by BitAssets) on the BitShares blockchain, where those short positions were also ultimately controlled by smart contracts (again this is a far off future version of BitShares I am talking about). You would have multisig managers controlling these assets and positions regularly (with certain programmed limits, like restricting how much money can be transferred to addresses/balances not controlled by the smart contract within a certain time window without explicit stakeholder approval, and restricting the prices allowed for the bid/ask orders within some percentage range of the price feed), but the managers or a quorum of the stakeholders could always revoke the control of the current managers if it became necessary. Then in those cases the stakeholders could find another group of managers to resume operations and elect if they can reach consensus on that slate with the necessary quorum of stakeholders.

But as long as you need to keep the cryptocurrency that you are doing market making with on a centralized exchange (which you will need to do for quite a while), that becomes a weak chain in the link in which authorities could seize those assets for whatever reason.

[Rune]

sumantso

I had wanted to get the other 10 BitGOLD/10 Shares thing. Is there an easy way to move into it from BTC? I can't work the wallet on my laptop.

This can be arranged, please PM me the amount you want to buy with BTC.

[Ander]

Send 100 to Ander. 
Also looking to buy some once they become liquid!

[sumantso]

sumantso

I had wanted to get the other 10 BitGOLD/10 Shares thing. Is there an easy way to move into it from BTC? I can't work the wallet on my laptop.

[testz]

Let's try 
BTS: testz

[Rune]

"(since most people understand that a coin does not confer any legal rights or responsibilities)."

This is not a true statement. Crypto currency is considered property. People have the right of ownership which is a legal right It is also a tax liability which is a responsibility
You also need to be very careful with the words you use. If ownership of a coin is supposed to represent ownership in a company similar to a share/security then it will be treated legally that way implicitly. Doesn't matter if there is a document or not. Really, it is worse if you don't have documents because a malicisous person could utilize this fact to black mail you.

All of this is assuming that CFS is a legal entity. (LLC/s-corp/c-corp/ect...) If it only exists in crypto technology and not on a document then I'm not sure how it will be treated since it isn't a legal company. I got road blocked on this when trying to utilize bitshares for Real Estate. A crypto company does not have the ability to own real property. (real property = real estate) There is too much red tape for a small timer like me to use bitshares for a legal company that can own real property.

I'm glad to get some input on this.

Cryptohedge is a DAC and will only ever exist on the bitshares blockchain and owning CFSCOIN does not give you anything other than owning CFSCOIN. For now, CFSCOIN is backed purely by the reputation of Riverhead and me (i.e. it will have value to people who believe we are going to do with it what we have said we plan to do with it).

My vision for how it will end up in its final decentralized "true DAC state" is where the only way it can interface with the real world is through contract-free compensation of employees (delegate style), and reputation based custodianship of client funds. The idea is to create a web of trust that starts out with me and riverhead and expands to include more employees, and could eventually potentially include trusted anonymous employees (trustable, yet untargetable by LE). The DAC should ultimately be 100% controlled by voting done by CFSCOIN holders, and the counterparty exposure that CFSGOLD and other assets get should be moved from Riverhead and me onto the CFSCOIN voters as a whole (through voting controlled smart contracts somehow ).

You are safe for now. If bitshares fulfills what it says it wants to then this will change. You'll have to adapt. I would not be surprised if the SEC considered the act of holding shares and having decision making power makes the property a security and the investors limited partners. Although it would not be a documented company it could be seen legally as acting like one which would put it in SEC court.

Again, you are probably safe for now, BUT I would advise that you save back for a good lawyer.

Yeah, I agree that it's pretty certain that I, personally, will be targeted for illegal fundraising eventually, no matter how much I insist on it being "contract free" or "just a coin". But that will only happen if BTS gets big enough to get noticed and in that case I should be able to afford whatever fine I'm given

The most important thing is that people who buy our UIA's should not be at any risk of getting their funds seized if me or someone else gets targeted.

It'd be more than a fine. Do you have a good lawyer already?

I have, but I have not done any legal consulting regarding issuing cryptocurrency tokens (and doubt I would get much out of it). I think you are assuming I live in the US. Luckily my jurisdiction is Denmark, where laws on finance and especially cryptocurrency are much more lenient. We don't even have to pay any taxes on any cryptocurrency gains! (and taxes are insane in denmark otherwise). Also we have a partially state owned bitcoin exchange

[yellowecho]

BTS:   yellowecho