804200+ entries in 0.526s
nubbins`: the prosecutor's argument is
that a frame job is ludicrous
nubbins`: the pill-heads defense is
that someone is framing
them
mircea_popescu: if you're a dweeby
teenaged male with no social circle
this won't stick,
nubbins`: i don't have a defense, i'm not in
the picture
mircea_popescu: so your defense hinges on
the jury buying
the
theory someone is stalking you.
nubbins`: so i drive 20 minutes
to a post office in
the next community
mircea_popescu: they do, but people don't hate
their neighbours inter-city.
nubbins`: it came from
the same city, even.
nubbins`: call
the cops again and say "i heard
them
talking about receiving a shipment of pills in
the mail"
nubbins`: so i
throw some pills into a box, write
their address on
the front, stick it in
the mail
nubbins`: cops are
there more frequently
than houseguests
nubbins`: because
they smash bottles in
the road all
the
time.
mircea_popescu: good for you, but still, anon dork wants judge
to believe someone hates him enough
to blow 10k on it ?
nubbins`: what's stopping me from mailing a key
to one of
them and
then
tipping off
the cops?
nubbins`: no, but i know several of
them
nubbins`: consider
that one could send a kilo of cocaine
to a reviled politician
mircea_popescu: all
the elements of plausible deniability as reddit imagines
them.
nubbins`: heh. just a
thought experiment, but all
the elements of plausible deniability are
there
mircea_popescu: hahaha i never heard of it, but hey, whatever floats
teh boat.
nubbins`: package arrives, is brought indoors and left on a
table, unopened
nubbins`: nah, bought. purchaser slightly misspells
their name when placing an order
nubbins`: this was
the classic "cover your ass"
tactic of
those who bought illegal items on SR and other websites
nubbins`: you mentioned earlier about
the inability
to refuse payments
to a published address
nubbins`: anyway, interesting instruments, SSWs, and
this should be illuminating
text for current and future holders of such instruments
nubbins`: it may be worth clarifying some of
these points
mircea_popescu: just as long as
the original fingerprint quoted in
the warrant signs for it.
nubbins`: i
took it
to mean
that S.MG would only issue
the shares
to an account with
the same fingerprint as
the SSW
mircea_popescu: it merely says X can't come and say here, i have an assigment by nubbins, on his warrant, so please accept MY pgp as a valid signature
to redeem shares.
mircea_popescu: o. you're reading
the "no
third party assignments"
to mean you can't have someone else's X ?
mircea_popescu: you can redeem just fine, you just can't redeem
to your own account if you don't have one
nubbins`: so
there's an implied, but not stated, 30BTC charge for redeeming an SSW
mircea_popescu: you notify s.mg
that X mpex account will be
taking Y share delivery on
this here warrant of yours.
nubbins`: sure, so what's
the process for me buying my shares directly from S.MG?
mircea_popescu: so on paper 1 it says "we don't handle
third party assignments" and on paper 2 it says "this is for buying directly"
nubbins`: but if "S.MG will not process or administer any assignments of
this Warrant"...
the IPO contradicts
that, when it defines an SSW
mircea_popescu: it's your damned business
to sort it out, and s.mg isn't getting involved.
mircea_popescu: nubbins`
the idea is
that if you decide
to
trade it
to x, and x
to y, and y
to zee,
nubbins`: more accurate would be "S.MG will not process or administer any assignments of
this Warrant", full stop
mircea_popescu: quote
the contrary, mpex processes assignments between
the holder and s.mg
mircea_popescu: so yeah, s.mg would at no point be processing assignments of
the warrant between its holder and mpex.
mircea_popescu: well... he's not about
to
take her on a date, so it's moot.
mircea_popescu: this strikes me sort-of like
the girl going
to
the gynecologist who says "don't let anyone stick his
thing in
there for
two weeks", at which point she replies "are you anyone ?!"
nubbins`: what's mpex? all i've got is a warrant
that mentions S.MG
mircea_popescu: and i suppose mpex would be a 3rd party except it seems moot ? what's
the case, mpex wants
to buy your warrant outside of itself ?
nubbins`: ^ is MPEx considered a
third party
nubbins`: "S.MG will not process or administer any assignments of
this Warrant by or among
third parties"
nubbins`: sure, yes, unfortunately
the analogy fails at
this point
Diablo-D3: nubbins`:
thats when you walk out and
tell
them
to fuck off
nubbins`: i eat a meal at a restaurant, head
to
the cash register, "oh sorry we don't
take cash"
nubbins`: we're back
to ex post facto. payment has a specific definition
mircea_popescu: this separation is actually one of
the best
things bitcoin is doing, even if few people had so far
teh mental penetration
to realise it.
mircea_popescu: just like
the receiver gets no say on whether he receives or not.
mircea_popescu: because bitcoin payments can not be refused by
the receiver, it logically follows
that any published address will be
treated exactly as
the owner describes.
nubbins`: you say donation,
they say payment.
nubbins`: they've fulfilled
the conditions of
the SSW
nubbins`: a warrant holder sends [y] BTC
to said address
nubbins`: even something as inocuous as "feel free
to donate btc
to S.MG for feature improvement at 1SmgFeaturesblah1234"
nubbins`: suppose at some point down
the road, S.MG happens
to publish a BTC address
that
they control
mircea_popescu: they can't, cause
tey have
to say what
their acct is before
they can pay.
nubbins`: one side of
the contract has been fulfilled
nubbins`: suppose a warrant holder pays [y] BTC
to S.MG, and
then announces
they don't have an mpex account
nubbins`: back
to SSW #3: "[PGP fingerprint] shall be issued [x] new S.MG shares upon payment of [y] BTC
to S.MG"
mircea_popescu: shares are what
they are, not what some noobs
thought
they were, in
the glbse days.
nubbins`: but
that doesn't preclude a direct issuance of shares
nubbins`: another venue, sure. i couldn't ask you
to issue my shares on, say, uh... wait, are
there even any play exchanges left?
mircea_popescu: as s.mg can not issue shares on another venue,
that's what it is.
mircea_popescu: yes, but
these being contracts made by smg
they're ancillary
to its ipo agreement which is also its incorporation charter.
nubbins`: IPO section 3.2(b) offers 3 conditions for future share issuance;
the first
two conditions explicitly list MPEx as
the venue, whereas
the
third, dealing with stock warrants, makes no mention of MPEx
nubbins`: on
the surface,
these
two statements appear
to cut MPEx out of
the picture altogether
nubbins`: SSW #3: "S.MG will not process or administed any assignments of
this Warrant by or among
third parties"