Topic: [ANN] peatio.com the world's first 100 percent public owned bitcoin exchange - page 6. (Read 16328 times)

I just hate that .io domains are much too expensive...

Let me be slightly more specific :

 - jp.peatio.com -> jp.peatio.ok = DODGY
 - jp.peatio.com -> peatio.jp = PERFECTLY FINE, but it's usually the other way around

Actually, a convenient centralized domain being redirected to the country most appropriate to the customer is a common practice (when done transparently upon the first visit) for large multinationals.

The problem is really just that it seems unfamiliar because small companies start out the other way instead of planning to be international.

For an exchange planning to cover a number of countries in a "personalized" way as this one is, it doesn't need to seem dodgy.  The destination sites can prominently identify themselves with the .com name if so desired.

But it seems you may have been calling the warning about navigating to a non-SSL site dodgy.  What would you suggest?  Novices can easily be tricked into revealing passwords when they rely on an insecure http: site to redirect them to a secure one.

Also, sovereignty refers to a country's perceived right to exert control over its own territory.  Whereas .com was envisioned as a global domain.

That's pretty much the definition of sovereignty.

It's the first time I hear such a concern...

That would look dodgy as fuck and be counterproductive as hell.

Please do not rely on .com or any domain likely to be seized by a government outside of the jurisdiction in which an exchange actually operates.  For instance, if you use peatio.com, you should expect to needlessly be part of a bulk domain seizure by the US government.  All of your subexchanges are likely to be pulled offline at some point.  The USG does not typically respect other countries' sovereignty where doing so would diminish its own.

Just as importantly, many of your prospective customers will worry that your exchange may go offline, which may send them elsewhere.

If you still prefer the marketability of .com, there is a workaround you may favor:  for anyone going to xy.peatio.com, immediately redirect them to a true .xy domain or to an offshore top-level domain you can trust ("xy.peatio.ok"), where .xy represents each country.

The redirections must be visible so that your customers will always know the true URL, so that when your .com is pulled, they know what to do.

The redirections should properly support https:// or they will encourage man-in-the-middle attacks.  (For that matter, anyone going to the http:// version of any of your sites should simply be told to try again with https://.  It is always insecure to passively redirect non-SSL to SSL connections.  Most sites violate this critical rule.)

You drove me to figure out a way, and I promise you that shares will be 100% available when IPO. Sincerely THANK YOU.

You're welcome.

And yes, Daveout is someone really experienced and almost unparalleled with creating exchanges. I'm sure his criticisms will advance the project a lot, and help iron out the kinks in the overall implementation.

Thank you for support, John.

And criticisms from @davout is very interesting and helpful for me to rectify our business plan. I'm struggling to make it better. I sincerely invite davout contact me on gtalk: [email protected], I would be very grateful if davout offers more advices.

Just to pop in and say that I'm one of the investors here in the bitfund.pe fund, and have faith in lixiaolai. 
He's somewhat a bitcoin leader in China.

There are, increase your awareness.

I'd be tempted to say it's the other way around, "when the IPO structure is released your business plan will be clear". That'd be assuming dishonesty though, let's not go down this road now.

Well then, it's not 100% public owned. Appears more and more misleading the more we start scratching the surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_capital and no, it's not a good question.

i think they have to pay the developers, servers, girls and stuff.

and where will the money go to? I mean who will get the money for the shares? When you buy something from someone there always has to be a paying and receiving party. At least in my book...

I think what @GGGGG said might a little bit misleading. sorry for that.

When the business plan releases, the IPO structure will be made clear.

100% public owned, doesn't have to mean 100% shares are available on IPO. The initial investor has to get some shares, and the rest shares will be sold through two stages, details of which will be release soon.

Are there any existing bitcoin exchanges which have issued shares? I'm not aware of any myself, but please let me know if there are.

Quoted for later.

-I am not a developer, I am an employee of Bitfund.pe, responsible for answering questions here. The business plan will be released soon.
-The front end of the exchange will be coded in Ruby on Rails, the back end will be done in Python and C++. We will also have mobile and desktop clients.
-We propose to make money like any exchange - through transaction fees.
-The creators of the exchange will buy shares on the market like everybody else.

So, it's 100% publicly owned ?
Because the shareholder own it ?
So how is it any different than any other exchange owned by its shareholders ?

I must say that I am sceptical,

I would definitely need to hear a lot more information about

- the developers of the system - who are you, what is your business plan
- the program language in which it will be written
- how do you propose to make money
- how will you make money as creators of the exchange - you sell the shares for bitcoins on IPO?

anyway I will be monitoring the thread but my gut feeling tells me something about scam.

If the shareholders are unhappy with the way the exchange is being run, they will be free to sell their shares on the open market. Much in the same way if a minority shareholder of Google doesn't like the way things are being run, what recourse do they really have to change things?

I suppose it is not P2P in the same sense that Bittorrent or Bitcoin are, although (as far as I know) there has not yet been a 100% publicly owned bitcoin exchange.

It's reasonable and how things are run usually, but there should be something unique that makes it deserving the "P2P" tag(I don't think I will call ASICMiner a P2P mining operation), right? Like if the shareholders are unhappy with the performance of the operating team what can they do about it?

I like your idea whether it's really P2P or not, I just want some clarifications.