Universa v Ether | Table O Contents
The Universa environment can be compared to the Ether ecosystem …
- Universa v Ether | Table O Contents
Flammarion Logo Badge in the page header above is an
.svg image file set to the dimensions of
auto height, and
zoom. Go ahead and test the
zoom-out feature by hovering over the badge to engage the expansion of the image from your desktop.
Hint. Place the intro paragraph ie.) the ‘synopsis’ here …
The two forms of ether that are used to drive the Smart Contracts over at the Ethereum Network are:
ETH = Ethereum, and,
ETC = Ethereum Classic.
The atomic bit used in the Universa network is called a ( UTN ).
The par value of (1) bit of UTN = $0.01 USD ( one US penny ).
Note. The smallest byte in the Bitcoin network ( BTC ) is called a “Satoshi”.
Here, (1) UTN bit is divisible by (18) decimal places, or “bytes”.
For example, 1,000 UTN are equal to $10 USD ( .01 x 1,000 = 10 ) called a “kUTN” or kilo.
Whereas, 1,000,000 “uUtn” are equal to 1 millionth of a US penny ( .01/1,000,000 = 0.000001 ) called a “uUTN” or “huelo”.
The Universa Foundation has authorized the sale of 1B UTN prior to 10-28-2017 at (1) penny USD plus a 20% bonus.
After 10-28-2017 kilos may be purchased at the then prevailing rate up to a limit of $99 million USD.
Smart Contract Chain(s)
The Universa platform will allow a tree of smart contracts to create a Smart Contract Chain.
Teaching a neural network to mine
More to come
As reported by Coin Desk, the following Crypto attributes are essential …
Core development team
Brilliant track record
A Smart Contract is simply a set of Turing Complete script data stored in a tree structure that can be executed universally across a platform.
Note. The weight of a Smart Contract over the Universa platform cannot exceed (1) Giga-byte of size.
- (1) GB = 1,024 MB of data
Question. How is script data stored in tree structures?
Answer: Key-value pairs in Merkle trees aka “databases on crypto steroids”
Question. What type(s) of script data can be stored in tree structures?
Binary executable logic
Dynamically executing scripts ( including structures of complex nesting representations )
Pointers to other trees on the network
Pointers to other Addresses on the network
Under the Universa umbrella, the Blockchain merely records the current state of the underlying Smart Contract. The body, or corpus of the Smart Contract remains stored in a crypto cloud, or flash drive.
When a Smart Contract hits the Universa network, a time stamp is issued by the Universa Notary Cloud.
Old states of smart contracts may be stored for (2) years in the Universa Notary Cloud via a separate smart contract called a marker.
- The structure of the Universa network is stored in many Trusted nodes of equal host.
Whereas, the Notary Cloud runs on a separate Unix server that contains the primary, dynamic copy of the ledger, Universa Nodes are alerted instantaneously of new, entering Smart Contracts and as a consequence the structure of the entire network may change as a result at any given fraction of a second, or nanosecond.
2/3 rd’s of the entire float of UNI coins are in the hands of the public.
10% of the entire float is reserved for the development team
The Universa Foundation holds 20% of the entire float
The remaining 4% is reserved for partnership, bounty provisions, and advisors
Securities Act of 1933
The Securities Act of 1933 prohibits even the offer, as well as the sale … If an underlying security, if defined as such, is unregistered or non-exempt.
Note. The Securities Act of 1933 does not specifically define an Investment Contract aka Security.
The Test of Security
Is it an offer?
Is it a contract?
Is it a scheme?
SEC v The Howey Co
- 328 U.S. 293 (1946)
In the US Supreme Court case of the SEC versus the Howey Company heard in May of ‘46 …
Several testing mechanisms for the term security were elucidated by the court, as follows:
Is there an underlying investment contract?
Is there a separate service contract attached to the offer?
Does the marketing scheme involve an investment of money?
Is the investment of money directed towards a common enterprise?
Are the profits ( or, losses ) of the investment expected to come about solely from the efforts of others, other than the investor?
For example, are the profits ( or, losses ) of the investment to come about solely from the promoter’s efforts, or from the efforts of a 3rd party?
Is the subject enterprise a speculative enterprise ( immaterial )
Are the shares in the enterprise evidenced or referenced by formal certificates ( immaterial )
Are the shares in the enterprise evidenced or referenced by nominal interests in the physical assets employed in the subject enterprise ( immaterial )
Is there a sale of property with or without intrinsic value included in the proposed security ( immaterial )
Is the broad protection of investors thwarted by unrealistic or irrelevant formulae as a result of the “maybe-an-offer”?
Are the Respondents using the US Mail system, or some other instrumentalities of interstate commerce ie.) the Internet, to propagate the “maybe-an-offer”?
Is the purported “maybe-an-offer” sufficiently vague to be considered NOT an offer?
Is there a date or time stamp emblazoned on the “maybe-an-offer”?
Is the meaning of the date or time stamp sufficiently known, or inferred to be known by a majority of the targeted class of persons?
The targeted class of persons are those individuals currently registered with the Venmo service as opposed to those who are expected to be enticed by the “maybe-an-offer” sufficiently to the point of seduction or inducement into registering with the Venmo service.
Will those individuals of either class of targeted persons then as a result transfer $5 cash from their Venmo accounts to the Venmo address of @Rwebaz?
Will those same individuals of either class of targeted persons who have transferred $5 cash from their Venmo accounts to the Venmo address of @Rwebaz then as a result be eligible to receive a return gift of (6) as yet undefined coins?
Is the return award of “(6) coins” sufficiently broad to escape the registration provisions of the Securities Act of 1933?
Which crypto currency shall the (6) coins be denominated in?
Will the digital “hard” wallet of the individual accept the type of coin denominated?
Do the targeted sets of classes of individuals all currently possess digital “hard” wallets?
Is there a unilateral offer to purchase proprietary digital “hard” wallets implicitly embedded in the underlying “maybe-an-offer” of the $5 transfer, if indeed determined to be an actual “offer” subject to the registration provisions of the Securities Act of 1933?
See: 328 U.S. 294 - 297 and 328 U.S. 299
UTN may lack the status of a legal tender, but nevertheless still retains the utility of a legal tender.
If that is clearly the object envinced, then the offer may be subject to the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933.
If on the other hand, the prototypically targeted “maybe-an-offer” is sufficiently vague, then not.
The above discussed “maybe-an-offer” does not fall within the penumbra of the Securities Act of 1933.
More to come …
Note. The above synopsis was derived from an article written by Blank Author .
- A Narrative of Psychology by Blank Author, Jan #1999
Please support the co-workers who aggregate the Source Links for our projects.
Like what you see in this project? If so, then support the authors and
machine-elves who aggregate the source links and pages for our projects via Patreon.