Pages:
Author

Topic: [BitFunder] Asset Exchange Marketplace + Rewritable Options Trading - page 64. (Read 129168 times)

full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
gj, but seriously cloudflare ? *sigh*

Yes, unfortunately bitcoin has attracted many script kiddies who are very capable of multi-gigabit attacks.

What problems have you had with CloudFlare?
I use it on many projects, even have 150Gh+ mining pool passing through it with no known problems.
Actually "mining" through it.  Grin

It's 'The Man' in the middle ...

They break the most fundamental principle of the internet, that is supposed to be 'end-to-end' for privacy, security and stability. From technical point of view nothing that comes out of CloudFlare can be trusted unless you trust them as a centralized entity. It's the perfect solution to a problem but at what 'cost' ? (not talking about money here)

There are other solution unfortunately at this point in time they are not that cost effective. (money wise)
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
gj, but seriously cloudflare ? *sigh*

Yes, unfortunately bitcoin has attracted many script kiddies who are very capable of multi-gigabit attacks.

What problems have you had with CloudFlare?
I use it on many projects, even have 150Gh+ mining pool passing through it with no known problems.
Actually "mining" through it.  Cheesy
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
gj, but seriously cloudflare ? *sigh*
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Fuck google. Mobile chrome keeps old news in the cache forever, and you have to manually reload the page to get a new one. Totally my browser's bad.

No biggie. It happens to the best of us. Smiley

If anyone has any more ideas for BitFunder, please share.
It is a service for the community, so I want it to be what people want. (As best as that can be figured out. Wink )
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.

Err.. I am looking at the page right now.. I see things like 'Withdrawal fee of just 0.1 LTC'... when I search the page for 'LITS', chrome gives me 2 results, both in the same line.
"Security Page: Support for splits and reverse splits. (thx osoverflow)"  splits & splits... and no finds for the word convert.

Looking at the main page for btct... again, it is the same... Perhaps Burnside can clarify this a bit more? Smiley
It might have been something they decided to remove.
 

Fuck google. Mobile chrome keeps old news in the cache forever, and you have to manually reload the page to get a new one. Totally my browser's bad.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250

I had a similar discussion with MPOE-PR in the first few pages of the BTC-TC thread.  My take on sharing of emails is that disposable emails are almost as easy to come by as disposable BTC addresses.  As long as you disclose up front what you'll be doing with them, you should be in the clear.  Users (hopefully) will be understanding, since it's largely for their protection, and if they really care, they'll use a disposable address.

I agree that no matter what interval you push out the lists, there's a chance that some trades will get missed.  We have an API the issuers can poll for finer grained control.  I know some poll at 5 minute intervals and store it more frequently.  My goal once revenue supports it is to replicate the db out to a separate facility in real-time, where a similar but reduced function site (you log in, you see your asset holders and your portfolio and that's it.) will be able to act as a backup source of the data.

Love the direction you're taking with the transparency.  I think it's going to work out pretty well.

Cheers.

Thanks!
Just a side note related to the thread. BitFunder does have redundant servers in multiple locations all around to help increase load times, as well as for disaster recovery.
Should one location go offline, the others can pick up for it in full force.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
Ahh, good call. Not all users from my experience (a few) have wanted their personal e-mail addresses made available directly to the issuers. (Esp. with all the scams that have gone around.) Awkward I think, but I have had people tell me this. Some have mentioned that "we have seen proof of how issuers will freely post what some people consider sensitive information".

While the forums system is definitely always an option, there are a few others as well.

Very soon, the issuer profile will be available for viewing, which will be required to have some form of contact outside of the exchange listed.
Granted, most people will not actually want to copy this information down.

I am adding an opt-in setting for users to be able to allow issuers to see their email address. This is to be added with the API updates.

I hope that most people would want to share their address. While much like BTC-TC any newer users that obtained shares since the last time the issuer pulls a list would not be contactable in this method. (Assuming the site is down and all data is unavailable.)

I had a similar discussion with MPOE-PR in the first few pages of the BTC-TC thread.  My take on sharing of emails is that disposable emails are almost as easy to come by as disposable BTC addresses.  As long as you disclose up front what you'll be doing with them, you should be in the clear.  Users (hopefully) will be understanding, since it's largely for their protection, and if they really care, they'll use a disposable address.

I agree that no matter what interval you push out the lists, there's a chance that some trades will get missed.  We have an API the issuers can poll for finer grained control.  I know some poll at 5 minute intervals and store it more frequently.  My goal once revenue supports it is to replicate the db out to a separate facility in real-time, where a similar but reduced function site (you log in, you see your asset holders and your portfolio and that's it.) will be able to act as a backup source of the data.

Love the direction you're taking with the transparency.  I think it's going to work out pretty well.

Cheers.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.

Great question! This gives me an excellent chance to clarify for anyone else who does not get it. Smiley

If a person was wanting to hide their identity, they simple generate a new address.
As long as they use this address for the public list, and do not receive or send any bitcoins from this address, it has NO history. Smiley

Should a user need to use this (and I sure hope it never happens.) then there are a multitude of ways to provide proof.

1. The user can send a micro transaction of BTC to the issuer, who could return it. (They then have proof of who controls that address.)
(One of the easiest methods to understand.)
2. The user can 'sign' an arbitrary message with their bitcoin address to show proof of control.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3337/what-are-the-safety-guidelines-for-using-the-sign-message-feature/3339#3339

These two methods alone should be more than enough to be able to show identification.

Appreciate the detail.  I don't think you really answered my question though?

- Exchange goes down.
- Asset issuer wants to contact all of the shareholders.

How does the asset issuer do that?

The MPEx approach is to make a public notice post to a few forums and call it good.  (see the thread on the delisting of the gigamining passthru where they gave 30 day notice via a forum post and an IRC message that it was going to be delisted, then delisted it Dec 1, wiping out bond holders.)

The BTC-TC approach is you take the list of email addresses from the regular BTC-TC email update in your inbox and you email all your shareholders.  (edit: AND then you go make IRC and forum posts.)

What is the BitFunder approach?  Based on your answer above it sounds like it's the "make a forum post" approach?

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

Cheers.

Ahh, good call. Not all users from my experience (a few) have wanted their personal e-mail addresses made available directly to the issuers. (Esp. with all the scams that have gone around.) Awkward I think, but I have had people tell me this. Some have mentioned that "we have seen proof of how issuers will freely post what some people consider sensitive information".

While the forums system is definitely always an option, there are a few others as well.

Very soon, the issuer profile will be available for viewing, which will be required to have some form of contact outside of the exchange listed.
Granted, most people will not actually want to copy this information down.

I am adding an opt-in setting for users to be able to allow issuers to see their email address. This is to be added with the API updates.

I hope that most people would want to share their address. While much like BTC-TC any newer users that obtained shares since the last time the issuer pulls a list would not be contactable in this method. (Assuming the site is down and all data is unavailable.)

legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.

Great question! This gives me an excellent chance to clarify for anyone else who does not get it. Smiley

If a person was wanting to hide their identity, they simple generate a new address.
As long as they use this address for the public list, and do not receive or send any bitcoins from this address, it has NO history. Smiley

Should a user need to use this (and I sure hope it never happens.) then there are a multitude of ways to provide proof.

1. The user can send a micro transaction of BTC to the issuer, who could return it. (They then have proof of who controls that address.)
(One of the easiest methods to understand.)
2. The user can 'sign' an arbitrary message with their bitcoin address to show proof of control.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3337/what-are-the-safety-guidelines-for-using-the-sign-message-feature/3339#3339

These two methods alone should be more than enough to be able to show identification.

Appreciate the detail.  I don't think you really answered my question though?

- Exchange goes down.
- Asset issuer wants to contact all of the shareholders.

How does the asset issuer do that?

The MPEx approach is to make a public notice post to a few forums and call it good.  (see the thread on the delisting of the gigamining passthru where they gave 30 day notice via a forum post and an IRC message that it was going to be delisted, then delisted it Dec 1, wiping out bond holders.)

The BTC-TC approach is you take the list of email addresses from the regular BTC-TC email update in your inbox and you email all your shareholders.  (edit: AND then you go make IRC and forum posts.)

What is the BitFunder approach?  Based on your answer above it sounds like it's the "make a forum post" approach?

Hope that clarifies things a bit.

Cheers.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.

Err.. I am looking at the page right now.. I see things like 'Withdrawal fee of just 0.1 LTC'... when I search the page for 'LITS', chrome gives me 2 results, both in the same line.
"Security Page: Support for splits and reverse splits. (thx osoverflow)"  splits & splits... and no finds for the word convert.

Looking at the main page for btct... again, it is the same... Perhaps Burnside can clarify this a bit more? Smiley
It might have been something they decided to remove.
 
Erm. This is how your site responded when I input the incorrect verification code. I didn't bother with a screenshot. The quoted text is what your site responded with when I input the incorrect verification code from email. To be clear, your site responded with the incorrect code I input, and the correct code

The message would have only been displayed to those who's code matched in a lowercase comparison, and only if a code had been generated for the email address within the last 5 minutes for obvious security reasons.

Thanks for that! The issue has been taken care of. Smiley

In the future, should you see any problems feel free to use the ticket system that will get someone's attention upon submission.

LTC-GLOBAL used to have verbage that when depositing and withdrawing you were trading your LTC/BTC for LITS/BITS as separate in-game tokens.

However, we had to drop LITS and BITS as currencies internal to the exchanges based on legal advice.  To be considered a separate in-game currency the conversion would need to be one-way.  Obviously we allow withdrawal, so we're stuck with LTC and BTC, which we still consider virtual currency, but a virtual currency outside our direct control much like WoW Gold, or Lindens.  Maybe someday we can go back to LITS and BITS, but it'll take a separate 3rd party setting up an exchange that accepts LITS and BITS tokens to get there.

Cheers.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.

Err.. I am looking at the page right now.. I see things like 'Withdrawal fee of just 0.1 LTC'... when I search the page for 'LITS', chrome gives me 2 results, both in the same line.
"Security Page: Support for splits and reverse splits. (thx osoverflow)"  splits & splits... and no finds for the word convert.

Looking at the main page for btct... again, it is the same... Perhaps Burnside can clarify this a bit more? Smiley
It might have been something they decided to remove.
 
Erm. This is how your site responded when I input the incorrect verification code. I didn't bother with a screenshot. The quoted text is what your site responded with when I input the incorrect verification code from email. To be clear, your site responded with the incorrect code I input, and the correct code

The message would have only been displayed to those who's code matched in a lowercase comparison, and only if a code had been generated for the email address within the last 5 minutes for obvious security reasons.

Thanks for that! The issue has been taken care of. Smiley

In the future, should you see any problems feel free to use the ticket system that will get someone's attention upon submission.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.

Great question! This gives me an excellent chance to clarify for anyone else who does not get it. Smiley

If a person was wanting to hide their identity, they simple generate a new address.
As long as they use this address for the public list, and do not receive or send any bitcoins from this address, it has NO history. Smiley

Should a user need to use this (and I sure hope it never happens.) then there are a multitude of ways to provide proof.

1. The user can send a micro transaction of BTC to the issuer, who could return it. (They then have proof of who controls that address.)
(One of the easiest methods to understand.)
2. The user can 'sign' an arbitrary message with their bitcoin address to show proof of control.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3337/what-are-the-safety-guidelines-for-using-the-sign-message-feature/3339#3339

These two methods alone should be more than enough to be able to show identification.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up?  Wink

That is why I said you would just create an extra address to use just for the public list.
With bitcoin wallets, you can have multiple addresses and use them for different things.
If you want the info to stay private, create a new address (that has no history), and use that. Smiley

Sounds good to me.  I'll be the first to admit that I don't completely understand the bitcoin protocol.  I've just skimmed some of the threads where the tracking of transactions is discussed and it's crazy some of the connections they seem to be able to make.

So the asset issuer has access to this public list of addresses.  If the site goes offline how do they contact their shareholders?  I feel like I must be missing a step somewhere.  Do the issuers get a different non-public list that includes more info?

Cheers.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up?  Wink

That is why I said you would just create an extra address to use just for the public list.
With bitcoin wallets, you can have multiple addresses and use them for different things.
If you want the info to stay private, create a new address (that has no history), and use that. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
I didn't want to hijack your thread any more than I had already.  I replied here:  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1395696

Suggestion: You may want to re-examine your theory on BTC addresses being anonymous and maybe only display them to the asset issuers that need them.

Again, I try to make all my projects as transparent as possible. I am even looking to allow users to be able to use multiple addresses so they can split their holdings on the public list, however even that feels like it would be abused in some way. If you do not want people to know who you are, just create a new address that will only ever be used for an emergency claim. I just do not see a reason why everyone can not have a copy of the same data, and be on the same page as long as it maintains user privacy. As an exchange, we are responsible for maintaining a simple form of data that people have traded with their real money for. I can not stress enough to anyone how important that data is, and what a large responsibility exchanges have to insure data integrity up to the worst possible case scenarios. This also help's users feel assured that the exchange itself is not scamming the system. Many accusations of 'trusting' GLBSE's data flew pretty quick. With even just some holdings information withheld, for whatever reason, leaves an opportunity for people to worry that 'unclaimed' shares might be falsely listed under another person/s. Giving a list to asset owners is nice. Letting users click and see something that references what is theirs and knowing that other people are checking too and adding up the totals to see that the numbers balance out... to me, this is not some 'feature', but a sense of relief and confidence in the safety of their investment that the users deserve to have access to.
BitFunder aims to help protect everyone, issuers, and users alike in a fair and balanced fashion.

I was referring to the fact that BTC address history is public and not really as anonymous as some think.  I didn't mean to infer anything else.  I wonder if I google all the addresses that are published if any of them will turn up in website footers or thread footers as donation addresses?  Or... if I run a competing exchange and I search my DB for all those addresses, I wonder if any of them will come up?  Wink

Cheers.

hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I actually have a litecoinglobal account, and not sure what you are talking about.. as far as converting LTC to some other thing... (other than shares?)
litecoinglobal uses LTC... btct uses BTC... Perhaps I misundestood something. Smiley

Check the home page on litecoinglobal.com - it clearly states that you convert LTC to LITS to use in the securities exchange game available on the site.
 
I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

This is a very true statement. Part of the reason for the previous amendment to the beta terms. I felt something extra needed to be there, as I still feel a more detailed and in depth version needs to be posted. And this kinda goes back to the first point of this reply. Smiley

Oh. Also:
Code:
Sorry, that verification code is invalid.

A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK
lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time. Wink
Quote
Erm.. care to clarify? Tongue
I see the difference of an i vs. I...

Erm. This is how your site responded when I input the incorrect verification code. I didn't bother with a screenshot. The quoted text is what your site responded with when I input the incorrect verification code from email. To be clear, your site responded with the incorrect code I input, and the correct code
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
While I have faith in Ukyo's abilities, I have some concerns with the legal issues (sorry). Those, however, are less important (to me) than the lack of Ts&Cs.

I'd like to see those spelled out much more explicitly before I'd like to invest or raise funds. IMO, the Ts&Cs are relevant whether or not the service is intended to pay any attention to the standing legal authorities - contracts & agreements are made among people, and while we don't have means to enforce contracts other than public shame, they're still good to have.

I actually have been writing something up to go with it that better explains what to expect. I have just been trying to do enough research to make it as correct as possible. Also. no need to be sorry. That is the point of the thread. Everything counts when trying to make something better. I am far from perfect, and so is BitFunder. It does make a great goal though. I am all ears.

Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I actually have a litecoinglobal account, and not sure what you are talking about.. as far as converting LTC to some other thing... (other than shares?)
litecoinglobal uses LTC... btct uses BTC... Perhaps I misundestood something. Smiley

I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

This is a very true statement. Part of the reason for the previous amendment to the beta terms. I felt something extra needed to be there, as I still feel a more detailed and in depth version needs to be posted. And this kinda goes back to the first point of this reply. Smiley

Oh. Also:
Sorry, that verification code is invalid.

A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK

lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time. Wink

Erm.. care to clarify? Tongue
I see the difference of an i vs. I...


hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
While I have faith in Ukyo's abilities, I have some concerns with the legal issues (sorry). Those, however, are less important (to me) than the lack of Ts&Cs.

I'd like to see those spelled out much more explicitly before I'd like to invest or raise funds. IMO, the Ts&Cs are relevant whether or not the service is intended to pay any attention to the standing legal authorities - contracts & agreements are made among people, and while we don't have means to enforce contracts other than public shame, they're still good to have.

Though in general I have a hard time buying into the "game" idea espoused by Mircea (in a blog article) - It's much more plausible in the way I see it being done on litecoinglobal now - converting your LTC into some other thing, now making it two steps removed from any kind of legal tender, and making it much more of a game, like most of the bitcoin casinos do.

I like the terms that burnside has there - regardless of what's legal where, everything is spelled out explicitly, and I know what to expect from the exchange as an investor or issuer.

Oh. Also:
Sorry, that verification code is invalid.


A: ws1iy4JQQS7V8oVK B: ws1Iy4JQQS7V9oVK


lulz. I suppose I will choose B this time. Wink

And...I have to kind a WeExchange account? hmm.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It is incorrect that BTC Trading Corp is operated by a US Citizen.  It is operated by a group of gentlemen that reside in Belize from an office in Belize City.  While I hold a large stake in the company, my role is roughly that of a webmaster.  I do not have access to the corporate bank account for instance, and core site operations like asset approvals, etc, are handled by the shareholders.

I apologize, I was reading the "Organization and Management" section of the LTC-GLOBAL asset. It mentions "Currently LTC-GLOBAL is majority owned by burnside", with the domain is maintained under your services in the U.S., and under "Financial Management" where it states "All costs to date have come out of burnside's pocket.", it appears is you are the "Big Cheese"/"Head Honcho"/owner along with the people you are designating as "shareholders" that buy into the "Corporation"(not sure what type?) that is registered in Belize? You might seriously want to consider posting an 'About Us' page listing off the Belize corporation information, as well as listing the people behind the corporation, and official titles and responsibilities. Show the people that it is a real corporation, and it has to means to operate as one. Smiley
(Also, it is very common for many small~medium businesses to post pictures and full profiles of the people operating, and making the decisions in the company.)
As it stands from an outsiders point of view, it's all you bud. Wink (And any "shareholders" a court decides to indict. Tongue) (While I was kind of joking about that, it is still a serious consideration.) So seriously think on putting something up to help show show _everyone_ who might be interested, and how real of a corporation that it is.

Lawyer and I did a lot of research into this.  While not impossible, this would be an incredible feat until you have some significant revenue.  The problem is that most (every country I could find except for the Cook Islands) already have the equivalent of an SEC and require exchanges to be registered.  They're not going to approve you for trading in other than the local currencies, and will require your exchange to operate solely within their jurisdiction.  I would absolutely love it if you find somewhere out there that is a good home for legit BTC exchanges, but even if you did, it would still be illegal for that exchange to solicit US investors.  I know everyone likes to poke fun at it, but there's more legitimacy in the virtual exchange (educational and entertainment purposes only...) than you might think.  The very fact that everyone on the forums pokes fun at it legitimizes it because it's something I can hold up in court, "see your Honor, no one took it seriously, they all understood what it was."  Anyway, I digress.  Wink

Oh yes, no one said it would be easy in any way shape or form. That's why no one has done it yet.
If you do not look, and press on, you never know. Smiley

As far as it being a joke, the moment you get into court, all laughs and games aside, the judge will ask you point blank, "If it's all 'virtual currency', fun and games, and exactly 'how' the users get this 'virtual currency' to trade it on your site since you do not sell it yourself. You could say "Users can 'mine' it using their already bought computers.", but I promise you within the first cross-examination, the DA will ask if "mining" uses additional electricity, and generally requires some investment of some sort, and could be traded out by many other central places for real currency, and if it has any sort of agreed value online or otherwise".

Putting that aside, you COULD argue that you are no different than a game company like World of Warcraft with your own 'virtual currency'. The problem is that unlike SecondLife, and many other's, you are not using your own 'virtual currency'. This is something you might want to consider doing with some simple fee-less third party exchanges, or possibly internally.

Although, I am curious what your lawyer thought about publicly trading "fake" shares of the "real" Belize corporation and treating those "fake" shares as "real" ones by giving out "real" dividends of "real" profits to those share holders as if they actually owned the "real" shares of the company, and how to deal with the Belize securities dept. if they come asking. (As you said, they won't be happy.) I do understand that you are claiming it is all fake, and has no value.. but I just don't see a judge agreeing with that in any way. "Yes your honor, none of our 'virtual shareholders' hold any real stock in our company. We just.. pay them out real profit worth of shares in that amount.. as if they actually owned them. It's all fun and games... for learning.. you see... ?" (Please, PLEASE tell me I missed something, because I feel bad now that I have considered and written this, and it is 5:10am. Tongue )

Short answer.  It's in the FAQ... "Q: Why should we trust this site after so many others have failed?", and on the main page in the list of done todo's where each feature has been crossed off as it was developed.

Longer answer:  litecoinglobal.com had this from day... 1?  maybe 2?  (btct.co being a clone of litecoinglobal.com)  There are no less than 3 different ways the asset issuers can get at the data.  In the website.  Via JSON API.  And via email.  The email is automatic... you get a copy of all your shareholders in your inbox twice a day.  MPEx poked all kinds of fun at me for the email feature, but the bottom line is that I have no idea if anything will ever happen to the site and I don't want to be responsible for anyone's economic loss.  So it'd be easy to shift from one of BTC Trading Corp's exchanges to another exchange elsewhere because we've always been about making it easy for the asset issuers to do their thing.  This may eventually be to our detriment, as the issuers really could leave at any time, but I still feel strongly that it's important to give your users the tools they need to succeed.

Ahhh, I apologize, I must have overlooked it or perhaps did not consider that the same. I think a lot of the problem is that many users do not trust the asset issuers when it comes down to money. Everyone has a scammer tag in their holster ready to quick draw the moment something even remotely smells funny, regardless of how well known, or reliable the issuer has been. We have already seen cases of people questioning issuers "where did XXX shares come from? Why do you have them? Do you have proof you owned them before YYY?" I guess in this respect, and the information not being out there for everyone to see, and not being 100% fully transparent just screams (to me, along with all the other voices in my head Wink ) like it would still lead to many MANY more potential major incidents with a lot of "he said, she said".

Suggestion: You may want to re-examine your theory on BTC addresses being anonymous and maybe only display them to the asset issuers that need them.

Again, I try to make all my projects as transparent as possible. I am even looking to allow users to be able to use multiple addresses so they can split their holdings on the public list, however even that feels like it would be abused in some way. If you do not want people to know who you are, just create a new address that will only ever be used for an emergency claim. I just do not see a reason why everyone can not have a copy of the same data, and be on the same page as long as it maintains user privacy. As an exchange, we are responsible for maintaining a simple form of data that people have traded with their real money for. I can not stress enough to anyone how important that data is, and what a large responsibility exchanges have to insure data integrity up to the worst possible case scenarios. This also help's users feel assured that the exchange itself is not scamming the system. Many accusations of 'trusting' GLBSE's data flew pretty quick. With even just some holdings information withheld, for whatever reason, leaves an opportunity for people to worry that 'unclaimed' shares might be falsely listed under another person/s. Giving a list to asset owners is nice. Letting users click and see something that references what is theirs and knowing that other people are checking too and adding up the totals to see that the numbers balance out... to me, this is not some 'feature', but a sense of relief and confidence in the safety of their investment that the users deserve to have access to.
BitFunder aims to help protect everyone, issuers, and users alike in a fair and balanced fashion.


I can say, with all honesty that I am impressed with BitFunder and hope that you succeed.  It's a great looking site, easy to use, and seems to introduce some great new features.  I have a lot of respect for you and have no doubt that you'll be a great asset to the community.

I do also like your systems voting model, it is a very unique and interesting system. Smiley
(Just make sure no one confuses it with a "real" shareholders vote! Wink )


legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Lead Blockchain Developer
Pages:
Jump to: