Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, msgreenf said:

what are you basing that comment on? why is it a pity?  It was released in 2012...

Says the guy dumping HC250's in the sale forum :) lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I care less about the number, am interested more about the functionality.  So whatever 3.0 will bring is more important. It’s time to upgrade for sure but I will definitely wait till the dust is cleared, the future will bring surprises for sure ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Says the guy dumping HC250's in the sale forum lol
I was referring to the pity part. And I was selling that hardware for a while.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, msgreenf said:

I was referring to the pity part. And I was selling that hardware for a while.
 

For sure don't feel bad for selling them when you knew they would be useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Pounce said:

If anything you are proving the validity of the shareholder dispute that the control4 board is sandbagging and giving SnapAV a deal.

I proved the validity of a shareholder dispute by saying that sharing rumors is bad?

Ok, then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been offloading my stack of HC250s I have accumulated for the last few months on ebay expecting the 250 and 800 to be on the cusp of a sunset regardless of any recent leaks just based on observing all new devices are android based so they have been moving the chess pieces slowly into place to eventually pull the plug on all HC controllers which are holding back progress and do a significant update

Screenshot_20190513-202141_Message.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thegreatheed said:

lol. if wapping was in this thread, it would be the hollywood illuminati who are forcing the merger to go through to maintain their HDMI monopoly.

in·sid·er trad·ing
/inˈˌsīdər ˈtrādiNG/
noun
 
  1. the illegal practice of trading on the stock exchange to one's own advantage through having access to confidential information.
     
    My understanding is that this post isn't the first one out there to discuss 3.0. Also you would have to prove the person who posted on this forum was purposefully giving privileged and confidential information with the purpose to themselves or help others make money by buying stocks ahead of the release. Then the stocks have to actually change based on said release of software. Sorry but many stocks drop after software releases if they traders don't think it's sufficient enough to keep up with competition. So telling people they are going to jail for posting on a public forum with already known information is a bit much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
1
2 minutes ago, Neo1738 said:
Also you would have to prove the person who posted on this forum was purposefully giving privileged and confidential information with the purpose to themselves or help others make money by buying stocks ahead of the release. 

Sorry, but that's wrong. You do not have to prove intent to be prosecuted for insider trading. Only that the information was insider information (obviously information about future features is) and that someone profited off of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but you have to prove the OP is the only source of said information. That OP was someone with privileged access to the information (ie worked for or contracts for and has this information) and then prove someone on this forum is going to profit from it. My understanding is that this thread wasn't the first mention of version 3.0 features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Neo1738 said:

Yes but you have to prove the OP is the only source of said information. That OP was someone with privileged access to the information (ie worked for or contracts for and has this information) and then prove someone on this forum is going to profit from it. My understanding is that this thread wasn't the first mention of version 3.0 features.

What? I didn't even reply to the OP. I replied to someone 'confirming' unannounced features.

I tend to think the act of 'confirming' rumor to be far more damning than talking about a rumor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It’s notoriously difficult for federal prosecutors to prove securities fraud

It may not be illegal to trade on information you overhear in public, on the train or at the movies.

The standards are high for proving such cases. In 2014, two hedge fund managers, Anthony Chiasson, cofounder of defunct Level Global, and Todd Newman, a manager at Diamondback, had their insider trading convictions overturned.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the evidence was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict, because “in order to sustain a conviction for insider trading, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that the person providing the information, the tippee, knew that an insider, the tipper, disclosed confidential information and that he did so in exchange for a personal benefit.

Prosecutors also need to prove that the person making the trades knew the tip came from illegally obtained information. In Billy Walters’ case, Walters also encouraged World Golf Hall of Famer Phil Mickelson to trade in Dean Foods stock.

 

 

Ever hear of the Samsung, Motorola, Google, etc feature or phone leaks? EVleaks the website hasn't been arrested for releasing information prior to public release because it's disseminated in a public forum. This is a public forum. If they took those features and traded the stock without telling publicly could be in trouble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Oftentimes, people accused of the crime claim that they just overheard someone talking. Take for example a neighbor who overhears a conversation between a CEO and her husband regarding confidential corporate information. If the neighbor then goes ahead and makes a trade based on what was overheard, he or she would be violating the law even though the information was just "innocently" overheard: the neighbor becomes an insider with a fiduciary duty and obligation to confidentiality the moment he or she comes to possess the nonpublic material information. Since, however, the CEO and her husband did not try to profit from their insider knowledge, they are not necessarily liable of insider trading. In their carelessness, they may, however, be in breach of their confidentiality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you want to give the FCC a reason to tear your life apart? I wouldn't. Speculating about rumors is good fun. 'Confirming' or otherwise saying you have insider information is reckless.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thegreatheed said:

Do you want to give the FCC a reason to tear your life apart? I wouldn't. Speculating about rumors is good fun. 'Confirming' or otherwise saying you have insider information is reckless.

 

I think you mean SEC and again you have to release the information with purpose of helping someone profit off it. Release in a public format is not insider trading. Again think if all the phone leaks prior to release. No one gets prosecuted for insider trading because they are releasing to the general public not personally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is comical with all the insiders and SEC Lawyers...

To the insiders... "Silence is Golden"

To the SEC Lawyer wannabes... "Don't quit your day job"

Nothing to see here folks, lets all move on and talk about all the geeky things we are doing with our control systems and get back to being the quirky and strange folks we all really are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cdepaola said:

This thread is comical with all the insiders and SEC Lawyers...

To the insiders... "Silence is Golden"

To the SEC Lawyer wannabes... "Don't quit your day job"

Nothing to see here folks, lets all move on and talk about all the geeky things we are doing with our control systems and get back to being the quirky and strange folks we all really are. 

Why do you care what people are discussing in this topic and why do you want them to stop? Kind of weird don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thegreatheed said:

I proved the validity of a shareholder dispute by saying that sharing rumors is bad?

Ok, then.

No. You think that there is some value in information about something that hasn't been released to the public yet (major version software increment). You think it has great value. The shareholder concern is that Control4 under valued themselves for the purchase so that SnapAV was getting a better deal than they should. Rather Control4 didn't really put themselves on the market and let the market decide. I don't think there is any value, but if there was a lot of value as you suggest then perhaps the company sold for less and the Control4 board cheated investors and lined the pockets of SnapAV... or so the story goes.

If nobody trades on the information about 3.0 then there is no insider trading. No trades. No trading. Sharing something that is a "rumor" isn't against the law.

I'm curious, does the dealer agreement with Control4 state that the dealer has in any way a fiduciary responsibility to Control4?

Assuming there is some sort of beta happening for 3.0 I'd imagine that the pending update would not be considered "confidential". If they are telling non employees with no fiduciary responsibility what's in the update and when it may be released then it's more or less public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I love C4 but have been disappointed by the lack of new releases in the last couple of years... the last real release was Intercom Anywhere (around 18 months ago or 30 months ago?).

As a consequence,  I am very excited to hear about 3.0 or any other rumors that imply something new and exciting is coming so will keep reading this thread with interest and hope, even if it all ends up being wrong 😂.

So feel free to pass on any ITK info you all have! I am listening 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can confirm the HC250 will not be able to upgrade to 3.0
the HC800 can but you will be unable to use the GUI 
This doesn't mean that they have to be removed from the project.
Usually if components can't be upgraded to the new major release they will stay on the old OS and will still work - I.e. connected IR buds and audio out will continue to work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, blub said:

This doesn't mean that they have to be removed from the project.
Usually if components can't be upgraded to the new major release they will stay on the old OS and will still work - I.e. connected IR buds and audio out will continue to work

That would work for me... 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...