Topic: GLBSE is offline We will update our users on Saturday. - page 15. (Read 51544 times)

Nope, we can argue it.

Hoarding is trading the current value of a commodity against it's future value. It is a transaction between Now-You and Future-You. Now-You might have enough value to buy an iPhone, but trades that current value to Future-You who has promised to buy him a little red sports car in 20 years.

It can also be viewed as a more complex form of trading if the hoarding is being used for market control, except now you are trading in emotions as well as commodities...

Do it! 
I had an IPO or two I was about to take the plunge on, if you set up an exchange I'll IPO there 

Couldn't agree with you more.

Interesting. He also said he had not talked to a lawyer yet, which is stupid.
Perhaps he did talk to one now,  and realized the legal consequences of what he is doing?

I have nothing wrong with guessing, I just think that narrowing it down to one option is far too limiting:

• Simple Lawsuit, needs to talk to lawyer/magistrate before he can re-open. May have a long term impact, may not.
• SEC/FSA are cranky about something and the sky is falling, maybe, unless they let him fix it and more on
• SEC doing clawbacks, does not trust system, insists on offline action. No long term impact except for those that get clawed
• IT issue that starting with the word "Whoops!" that requires recovering from backup or fscking a few volumes. No long term impact.
• Failed Upgrade, see above
• POTENTIAL security issue like a backdoor or vulnerable component was discovered, and is being fixed before it gets exploited. No long term impact.
• Has not paid hosting bill and provider shut him down until they get paid. No long term impact, assuming it is paid.

Now, I agree that about half of these should have had a better notification process in at least half of these scenarios, but I bet there are other, explanations as well. If I had to guess at one , I'm on the SEC Clawback train, but I have a transfer in my hand to hop on the IT Issue Bus, because it is about as likely in my experience. Honestly the "Goat sued him" line is right up there on the probability scale too.

What did I miss? There must be a couple other possible explanations. If we are going to play guessing games let's at least get a good menu built!

You could argue that, up to the point where someone comes up and says "hoarding destroys value". At which point you can't argue that anymore.

IMHO, the problem with these companies is less the question of scamming, it's more their announcement strategies. E.g. GLBSE: I simple: "We doing a major security upgrade to the site. More information available on saturday" would be an improvement. The lack of information reminds me of the information politics used during legal activities.

I didn't realize I missed so many conference videos. Just finished getting caught up on just about all the videos and everything makes a lot more sense now.

GLBSE is working with lawyers / legality / regulations (hence no communication for a week so far).
BFL devices are real and being tested. GLBSE and BFL are working together since the majority of income for them is a result of the security exchanges and miner stocks/bonds.

People have a lot of good ideas in the community that'd I like to see come to fruition. The conference was a good indicator of that.

Ok, now that I've said this I've got to A) make note of this post for a later "I told you so" moment, and B) brace myself for the fury of tin-foil hat wearing paranoids who think everything and everyone is scamming them.

I have been getting a couple percent a month. Nothing huge, I have been caught by suprise a couple times, but still better than my 401k is getting.

Well, the lenders who make a service of loaning coin to the creators of bonds who in turn loan coin to the people who loan coin for bonds to insure the interest-bearing bonds that they insure for themselves and then pay claims to the people who loan coins to the creators of bonds whose only trade volume is bots playing against each other with artificially fabricated bid walls might have made a couple of points.

But the rest of the world pretty much just took the shaft from all the amateur manipulators and business tycoon types who are killing this economy.

Thanks for the link. Haven't watched the conference yet, so might as well do it now!

Well, recently I have made some good guesses 

And I honestly see no other explanation for what happened this week.

Not me. I lost about 20% in the last few months due to scams (FPGAMINING) and capital devaluation (several mining assets).
So this can be an apt conclusion of my BTC investment career: Better to go with a bang.

was anyone actually making a profit (besides owners of 'companies') in the last few months ?

Yep, that would be what you are doing

At the Bitcoin conference he said GLBSE has not had any problems from government. Guess a lot can change in 3 weeks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmPD_YSQ--k&t=25m18s

You could argue that this is the same thing as trading them.

This is actually false. People wanting bitcoins is what gives them value, not people trading them.

Well, I think you would agree that it has to grow to a degree, or at least it would be good if that happens. For instance, I think SR is contributing a lot to the long term viability of the currency as a store of value (the aspect of Bitcoin I think you are mostly interested in). Even if it's only for a time, it helps bootstrap confidence until a critical limit is reached.


What I meant is, the path to formation comprises malformation. I'm as sorry as you that things developed this way, and it would be much much better if they didn't, but I think all this is part of the thinking process. It's hard to predict the future. As a result of all this, I'm confident that we will have more and more functional ways to do business freely and it will be an overall win. However hard we try, we won't be able to come up with a working thing without going through these phases.

I lost coins in a wide variety of transactions. Hell, even bitvapes.com has failed to deliver my items. It's an ethical dilemma. On one hand, you could be giving money to an unethical person, thereby incentivizing unethical behaviour. On the other hand, I think you have the duty to give a chance to people who try.

I would have ten times the coins I have now if I had just hoarded. Maybe this is just me refusing to believe I made a mistake.


I'm not saying they are. By all means, Bitcoin has the capability of being a store of value. I'm just arguing against the contrary, that investing your coins in risky enterprises are pointless, stupid or whatever.

I was just re-reading Nefario's posts from last week and it looks like the only immediate registration happening at this point in time is registration as a company.  Presumably not even that will be happening until theymos divests his shares as theymos is unwilling to be named on any company documents.  Whatever longer term plans Nefario has for GLBSE being regulated seem unlikely to move forward while theymos is still holding a significant parcel of shares.