For US what states are allowed or not whichever is the shorter list. I could not find it on the website.
When you go to apply you get this requirement:
NOT a resident of the following U.S. States: AL, CT, FL, GA, HI, LA, NM, NY, NC, OR, VT
This is great news! As MaidSafe gets closer and closer to launching, it will become increasingly more important to play the “crypto game” and foster industry relationships and connections.
As JohnM has answered, the following states: AL,CT,FL,GA,HI,LA,NM,NY,NC,OR,VT
MainNet transitions or swaps are becoming an important part of the financial services that exchanges provide. BitMax.io is leading the charge here helping with a few MainNet swaps for Binance Launchpad projects.
Just created an account. Thanks again.
When SAFENetwork launches(Even the flemming mvp/e), it will also push ChainRift in to the public eye.
People are going to want to get on board.
LOL @ poloniex - Goodbye poloniex, WE won’t regret your loss. haha.
Very thankful for HitBTC!
NY and FL two of the largest populations of states. FL is crypto friendly so maybe they will be added soon.
Can I take the opportunity to ask Chainrift how they feel about listing a token that will lead to the next generation insta-coins (or at least a different crypto beast to blockchain based projects), and have you begun to give any thought on how to host a true SAFECoin market.
“No answer yet” - it being the xmas period and new year is an acceptable answer, you have already done so much for this community. Cheers!
@ales85 I wonder that [Order Depth] would be a better default graph, than [Price/Volume].
We’re always on the lookout for new coins. However I don’t think this forum (this thread) is a place for such a discussion. Anybody that wishes to have their coin listed should submit a token listing request ( https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdnERAOhZER4j9CRTRzUSZZe65UwYd8cqc8i8HemnKD4tKULQ/viewform ) and it will be reviewed.
On the topic of transition to SafeCoin, we’re believers in the project since much earlier and we are taking note of the progress the project is making. We also intend to be ready for when the network go into ready stage (most likely post beta).
You might very well be correct and we are reviewing such options as well.
Never heard of chainrift before this TBH, but good news anyway
We’ve been around for a while, under the radar
We value transparency and quick support, at the very least. Be sure to give us a try!
In the spirit of transparency, are there any circumstances wherein you would require a customer, prospective or established, to take a ‘selfie’ in lieu of notarized identity documents?
I’m developing a next generation trading bot, (as mentioned at Introduce yourself) it will be used by others and drive business to supported exchanges, however I cannot in good faith add support for exchanges having that potentiality as it is an unnecessary and grave security liability.
To preemptively address any possible suspicion by those not involved in infosec, I comply with all lawful obligations, including taxes, and recommend the same to others.
If i understand you correctly, we only require selfies for the purposes of verification, which is currently only required of one wants to withdraw more than the 2.5k USD/day and 25k USD/month.
If we would remove the “free” tier we would either keep existing users as legacy with the same conditions (keep trading)
if this wasn’t possible we would allow them to withdraw funds without being able to trade until verified.
Naturally this would be mandated by legislation. And, just to make it clear, there would at least be an option for the users to withdraw their funds without providing a selfie (KYC).
If this doesn’t answer your question feel free to followup.
May I inquire as to the rationale for the industry standard of notary, accepted by financial institutions and courts, being insufficient for verification?
I recognize that the business process efficiency of a ‘selfie’ is appealing, however there should be alternative options available, perhaps with a fee, for those who are aware of its dangers. Even if it is as involved as requiring a bar certified attorney to function as the intermediary in relaying notarized identity documents, it would be perfectly reasonable.
Correct me if I’m wrong but what you wrote boils down to “why the industry requires selfies and if we’d be willing to accept identity verification by e.g. a bar verified attorney”.
If this is the case then selfies are required in order to establish a direct link between the id and id holder/owner and reduce chances of using stolen identity. We are aware that by collecting such data (at ChainRift we’ve chosen professionals) there’s a chance this may get out, although we’ve taken maximum measurers to prevent this from happening.
To answer your other question, yes, we’re definitely open to other options that users would have greater confidence in while this would allow us to maintain at least the same level of trust in the provided identity.
The extra fee you mention would probably be required because the cost of such a review would definitely be substantially higher.
What are you referring to by industry? Because for decades, if not centuries, notary has been the standard in industry. It is only crypto exchanges that have recently introduced the unusual and dangerous practice of requiring ‘selfies’.
Furthermore, there is nothing in law in the US that requires it. To the contrary, with jurisdictions becoming aware of the risk intrinsic to biometric data collection, and passing laws against it, I would be surprised if companies engaged in the practice will not be facing substantial liability as their customers become victims of it.
I would very much appreciate an alternative option to be offered and I thank you for appreciating the concern. It’s also a tremendous opportunity for your exchange to offer a privacy-respecting option for identity verification. How quickly could the details, including associated fee, be made available?