Why is there such a difference between the Bitfunder/Bttc passthrough prices at the moment? Currently ~0.69BTC vs~1BTC respectively. I'm not implying that there is anything wrong with either passthrough, I just don't understand the psychology of it.
Links for the lazy
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.ASICMINER-PT
https://btct.co/security/ASICMINER-PT
Topic: [BitFunder] G.ASICMINER-PT - page 26. (Read 74891 times)
Is your scummy tracking cookies detailed in your privacy policy? This is an outrage!!
I kid
I kid
lol
Is your scummy tracking cookies detailed in your privacy policy? This is an outrage!!
I kid
I kid
Hehe, in the bitcoin world it is fairly honest.
I mentioned previously in another thread but I will say it again here.
If you look at most sites in the bitcoin world which actually have a ToS, it is generally a laundry list being very repetitive, but in specific ways, and then in general, that they are not responsible. It is like saying "
If you buy my car:
* I am not responsible if the breaks go out
* I am not responsible if you get a ticket
* I am not responsible for the current condition of the car
* I am not responsible for any problems that may occur due to the on-board computer being linked to my systems which may cause your car to suddenly combust
* I am not responsible or liable for any damages
etc
"
In then end, it's just making a fool out of you, because no where in there, do they state that they ARE responsible for anything or give you any expectations other than loss.
Very very few sites take any responsibility for any actions that may occur.
For example. how many sites do you know that suddenly claim "We've been hacked!" and what happens? You end up with a negative balance.
Or they just go away and never come back. Why not? They have no obligation to have to pay you back, other than their reputation.
You cold contact authorities etc, but in the bitcoin world, its a very tough thing to deal with. But I am getting off topic.
In the end, most sites take no responsibility for your use of their site. That's that.
Very few such as BitFunder even offer to try to do their best.
The majority of it (Section below what you copied) is a larger list of things that BitFunder promises to do, and has expectations of.
Again, not many sites bother with what you should EXPECT from then.
I do not see any reason to give 20 pages of reading about responsibility deferment in detail when it can all be summed up, and provide you with a list of expectations instead.
On a side note, it will actually be changed to have a little more legalese hopefully within the next few months due to greater things.
Have a cookie.
I mentioned previously in another thread but I will say it again here.
If you look at most sites in the bitcoin world which actually have a ToS, it is generally a laundry list being very repetitive, but in specific ways, and then in general, that they are not responsible. It is like saying "
If you buy my car:
* I am not responsible if the breaks go out
* I am not responsible if you get a ticket
* I am not responsible for the current condition of the car
* I am not responsible for any problems that may occur due to the on-board computer being linked to my systems which may cause your car to suddenly combust
* I am not responsible or liable for any damages
etc
"
In then end, it's just making a fool out of you, because no where in there, do they state that they ARE responsible for anything or give you any expectations other than loss.
Very very few sites take any responsibility for any actions that may occur.
For example. how many sites do you know that suddenly claim "We've been hacked!" and what happens? You end up with a negative balance.
Or they just go away and never come back. Why not? They have no obligation to have to pay you back, other than their reputation.
You cold contact authorities etc, but in the bitcoin world, its a very tough thing to deal with. But I am getting off topic.
In the end, most sites take no responsibility for your use of their site. That's that.
Very few such as BitFunder even offer to try to do their best.
The majority of it (Section below what you copied) is a larger list of things that BitFunder promises to do, and has expectations of.
Again, not many sites bother with what you should EXPECT from then.
I do not see any reason to give 20 pages of reading about responsibility deferment in detail when it can all be summed up, and provide you with a list of expectations instead.
On a side note, it will actually be changed to have a little more legalese hopefully within the next few months due to greater things.
Have a cookie.
I'm pretty impressed with Bitfunder's reinvestment option... Currently reinvesting my dividends into more G.ASICMINER-PT shares... I'll see how I feel next week... But seriously, can we get some better terms or conditions than
- We (BitFunder) do not accept responsibility for anything.
- WARNING: Use at your own risk.
- You must agree to 1 and 2.
Sweet, I didn't even know they also had re-invest(DRIP)!
Nice terms, does it really say that? lol
I'm pretty impressed with Bitfunder's reinvestment option... Currently reinvesting my dividends into more G.ASICMINER-PT shares... I'll see how I feel next week... But seriously, can we get some better terms or conditions than
- We (BitFunder) do not accept responsibility for anything.
- WARNING: Use at your own risk.
- You must agree to 1 and 2.
How does that happen? Fat fingers?
NahI simply didn't count that well xD
It has all been paid out now
//DeaDTerra
How does that happen? Fat fingers? :)
211 BTC paid the other 0.40599 will come in 6 confirms 
I miscalculation a bit xD
//DeaDTerra
I miscalculation a bit xD
//DeaDTerra
As of many many many hours ago, DeadTerra shared with me a msg from Friedcat confirming 11,032 shares within DT's control.
All shares are live on the asset with a pretty new live-updating chart.
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.ASICMINER-PT
All shares are live on the asset with a pretty new live-updating chart.
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.ASICMINER-PT
DeaDT I sent you a pm to list some of my AsicMiner shares on this pasthrough.... Let me know pls if you need more info
Thanks
Thanks
Awesome
I still have 0 confirms at the moment, but I will pay out as quickly as I can //DeaDTerra
Awesome
I still have 0 confirms at the moment, but I will pay out as quickly as I can //DeaDTerra
Awesome
A dividend of 0.01916298 BTC per share has been received
I will pay it out in a bit (waiting for confirms to send it to BF)
//DeaDTerra
I will pay it out in a bit (waiting for confirms to send it to BF)
//DeaDTerra
I don't have much time at the moment, so a more proper answer will be given later today.
No I am not getting a direct profit from this PT,
It's a favor to Jon (BF owner) for helping me out in the past.
We discussed a potential payment from Jon, in the case where the PT trades larger volumes,
Other then that I am doing it for free.
I have talked to Friedcat, he's aware of what I am doing and what my intention are.
He has said that he has no problem with the PT as long as he only has responsibility to the direct share holders aka Me,
And I then in return have a responsibility to the indirect share holders aka any share holder or G.ASICMINER-PT.
The shares are indeed transferred over to me and then a equal amount of shares are created and sent to that person.
So I have not sold any of GBF shares, nor any of my own.
It's simply a pass through to enable people to sell and buy shares.
//DeaDTerra
No I am not getting a direct profit from this PT,
It's a favor to Jon (BF owner) for helping me out in the past.
We discussed a potential payment from Jon, in the case where the PT trades larger volumes,
Other then that I am doing it for free.
I have talked to Friedcat, he's aware of what I am doing and what my intention are.
He has said that he has no problem with the PT as long as he only has responsibility to the direct share holders aka Me,
And I then in return have a responsibility to the indirect share holders aka any share holder or G.ASICMINER-PT.
The shares are indeed transferred over to me and then a equal amount of shares are created and sent to that person.
So I have not sold any of GBF shares, nor any of my own.
It's simply a pass through to enable people to sell and buy shares.
//DeaDTerra
I recommend turning down offers of volume based kickbacks.
From https://btct.co/ "The DEV Log" tab:
Quote
?possible? Kick-backs for asset issuers with large volume, eg, 0.5% of transaction fees for assets with over 10k/mo in volume. (thx EMIF) -- (probably not going to do this. it would encourage asset issuers to generate transactions by intentionally inducing volatility --burnside)
I'm glad that you were willing to disclose it though. Speaks very highly of your integrity.
Cheers.
I don't have much time at the moment, so a more proper answer will be given later today.
No I am not getting a direct profit from this PT,
It's a favor to Jon (BF owner) for helping me out in the past.
We discussed a potential payment from Jon, in the case where the PT trades larger volumes,
Other then that I am doing it for free.
I have talked to Friedcat, he's aware of what I am doing and what my intention are.
He has said that he has no problem with the PT as long as he only has responsibility to the direct share holders aka Me,
And I then in return have a responsibility to the indirect share holders aka any share holder or G.ASICMINER-PT.
The shares are indeed transferred over to me and then a equal amount of shares are created and sent to that person.
So I have not sold any of GBF shares, nor any of my own.
It's simply a pass through to enable people to sell and buy shares.
//DeaDTerra
No I am not getting a direct profit from this PT,
It's a favor to Jon (BF owner) for helping me out in the past.
We discussed a potential payment from Jon, in the case where the PT trades larger volumes,
Other then that I am doing it for free.
I have talked to Friedcat, he's aware of what I am doing and what my intention are.
He has said that he has no problem with the PT as long as he only has responsibility to the direct share holders aka Me,
And I then in return have a responsibility to the indirect share holders aka any share holder or G.ASICMINER-PT.
The shares are indeed transferred over to me and then a equal amount of shares are created and sent to that person.
So I have not sold any of GBF shares, nor any of my own.
It's simply a pass through to enable people to sell and buy shares.
//DeaDTerra
The table in that is based on the value of shares you sell. I'm a few tiers up in it myself fro my sales whilst trading.
TradeFortress appears to be claiming DT will get get credit somehow by someone else selling shares in his asset. I wasn't aware that existed : it ought to be publicised if asset issuers get credit for sales they aren't involved in, as that's something of definite benefit to potential future asset issuers.
TradeFortress appears to be claiming DT will get get credit somehow by someone else selling shares in his asset. I wasn't aware that existed : it ought to be publicised if asset issuers get credit for sales they aren't involved in, as that's something of definite benefit to potential future asset issuers.
From what Ukyo and others have said in this thread, friedcat appears to be involved with what DeaDTerra is doing, making this the only currently authorized ASICMINER listing. That's what makes this OK -- friedcat knows what is going on and has confirmed his support.
That will change when ASICMINER makes their own exchange, I assume. But for now, this is as close as you can get to "real" ASICMINER shares. I wouldn't be surprised if friedcat starts telling people to go deal with DeaDTerra
Not sure what your comments have to do with my post you quoted (it reads as though you thought I was in some way opposed to it).
I was asking about the mechanics of how (according to TradeFortress) asset issuers get credited in some way for trade on their assets without making sales themselves. I don't know how reliable or credible TradeFortress is - but it's the first I've heard that moving up the gee table can be done without actually selling anything.
I've no problems at all with the listing - and if DT wants to run it for free, I'm certainly not going to complain. And I'm sure I'll be trading it once we get a few people selling shares.
I do think you may be reading more into friedcat's involvement than is actually the case (jumping from him being aware of it to him approving of it without any source - when his OWN comments on pass-throughs/derivatives in general suggested he didn't support OR approve of them, just accepted them as inevitable).
And I'm not sure how you think some element of approval by firedcat makes this OK. It's fine regardless of whether he approves or not. A pass-through, at root, is essentially an investment fund which only holds one asset: there's no need for approval from asset issuers to hold their securities.
The table in that is based on the value of shares you sell. I'm a few tiers up in it myself fro my sales whilst trading.
TradeFortress appears to be claiming DT will get get credit somehow by someone else selling shares in his asset. I wasn't aware that existed : it ought to be publicised if asset issuers get credit for sales they aren't involved in, as that's something of definite benefit to potential future asset issuers.
TradeFortress appears to be claiming DT will get get credit somehow by someone else selling shares in his asset. I wasn't aware that existed : it ought to be publicised if asset issuers get credit for sales they aren't involved in, as that's something of definite benefit to potential future asset issuers.
From what Ukyo and others have said in this thread, friedcat appears to be involved with what DeaDTerra is doing, making this the only currently authorized ASICMINER listing. That's what makes this OK -- friedcat knows what is going on and has confirmed his support.
That will change when ASICMINER makes their own exchange, I assume. But for now, this is as close as you can get to "real" ASICMINER shares. I wouldn't be surprised if friedcat starts telling people to go deal with DeaDTerra
DeadTerra also works up the sliding fee scale on BF and will pay less fees for selling assets.
How does that work?
I knew the person selling the shares (in this case the owner of the ASIC-MINER shares transferred in) would get a volume discount - but are you saying the asset issuer gets volume discount for shares he TRADES to people (without ever selling them via the market or paying a fee)? Isn't that just a little bit abusable?
https://bitfunder.com/help I assume its this.
The table in that is based on the value of shares you sell. I'm a few tiers up in it myself fro my sales whilst trading.
TradeFortress appears to be claiming DT will get get credit somehow by someone else selling shares in his asset. I wasn't aware that existed : it ought to be publicised if asset issuers get credit for sales they aren't involved in, as that's something of definite benefit to potential future asset issuers.
Jump to: