Crypto currency

Big/Sky/Fly

We're All In This Psyop Together...
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
52,097
Reaction score
11,613
Points
113
Location
Moonover, Montana
Crypto claimed to be decentralized...but, that's a lie. It sounded good at the time I guess. It was planned out a long time ago to be the future money. Bitcoin was designed to pave the way/get all the snags out before they tank the dollar and all other world currencies.
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
Crypto claimed to be decentralized...but, that's a lie. It sounded good at the time I guess. It was planned out a long time ago to be the future money. Bitcoin was designed to pave the way/get all the snags out before they tank the dollar and all other world currencies.
You are conflating a number of things so that this does not make sense.

Crypto is private money, programmable money, that's all. Those who create the money distribute it in various ways, and some keep more than others, to fund development on the blockchain, so every crypto has a different level of centralization, and there are 11,000 of them, give or take.

The applications programmed on the chain may or may not be decentralized.

But to say "crypto claimed to be decentralized" is like saying "water claimed to be good to drink", it's an inanimate object that makes no claims, and water may or may not be good to drink, depending on the source. Without being specific, the statement is just nonsense. You can't take a sip from the Atlantic, or a public swimming pool, and declare that water is not good to drink.
 

John Galt

Previously johnlocke
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
18,307
Reaction score
8,930
Points
113
Age
49
Location
Galt's Gulch
I am opposed to, on legitimate and fundamental Laiseiz Faire Capitalism grounds to any intrusion in the marketplace by the government. It does nothing but stifle innovation, violate rights, and far more when it does so. I'm questioning why would it be a good idea to regulate, through government intervention in an in flux yet burgeoning market. Seems nothing but disaster can come from that thinking and action.

That said, I am so ignorant on the topic of crypto that I do not understand how an anonymous, like cash, transaction is even seen and monitored by the government in the first place. Isn't the point of crypto that it is secure and anonymous?
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
I am opposed to, on legitimate and fundamental Laiseiz Faire Capitalism grounds to any intrusion in the marketplace by the government. It does nothing but stifle innovation, violate rights, and far more when it does so. I'm questioning why would it be a good idea to regulate, through government intervention in an in flux yet burgeoning market. Seems nothing but disaster can come from that thinking and action.

That said, I am so ignorant on the topic of crypto that I do not understand how an anonymous, like cash, transaction is even seen and monitored by the government in the first place. Isn't the point of crypto that it is secure and anonymous?

Let me put it this way....

The government does not have any clarity in definitions of crypto currency, but it is actively engaging in regulation by litigation, in such a way that they force settlement, without ever having to define what makes a crypto a "security" vs a "currency".

There is only one agency actually putting up a fight, and that is the SEC vs Ripple case, and the SEC is losing badly, it seems. The progress of the case has shown that, for example, it appears that the agency is acting on behalf of Etherium against it;s competitors, where the former SEC chief was getting paid millions of dollars to consult for Etherium, and on his last day in office, filed the lawsuit against Ripple, then went to work for Etherium.

Further, Ripple had been consulting with the SEC for years trying to get guidance and compliance while developing their network, and the SEC did a 180 and filed the suit against Ripple 8 years after the fact.

Further, it appears that SEC employees may have been buying, selling, and trading XRP, the currency of Ripple, with clearance from the SEC, because they are not allowed to trade securities while working for the SEC, as a conflict of interest...meaning the SEC did NOT consider XRP a security for 8 years, and then all of a sudden changed their mind and filed the lawsuit, for no apparent reason, other than to benefit Etherium, which was only possible because there is literally nothing written in law or statute defining what specifically makes a crypto a security or not.

They are also filing many other lawsuits against exchanges for selling securities, and then settling for money, and refusing to specify which cryptocurrencies specifically were securities, and which were not, and why.

Therefore, the crypto industry is constanty under threat from the government, not knowing whether they are violating the law or not, and every effort to get guidance is denied.

The crux of the matter is, the United States is one of the least friendly, least desirable nations to create new technologies and new businesses in the crypto asset class on the planet, and thus new projects are establishing themselves in other countries, and existing enterprises are leaving the country, in favor of other nations that have clear regulations and definitions, and aren't trying to attack the industry.

Crypto is creating the 21st century Silicon Valleys and Apple/Microsofts, and they will not be in the United States.
 

John Galt

Previously johnlocke
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
18,307
Reaction score
8,930
Points
113
Age
49
Location
Galt's Gulch
Let me put it this way....

The government does not have any clarity in definitions of crypto currency, but it is actively engaging in regulation by litigation, in such a way that they force settlement, without ever having to define what makes a crypto a "security" vs a "currency".

There is only one agency actually putting up a fight, and that is the SEC vs Ripple case, and the SEC is losing badly, it seems. The progress of the case has shown that, for example, it appears that the agency is acting on behalf of Etherium against it;s competitors, where the former SEC chief was getting paid millions of dollars to consult for Etherium, and on his last day in office, filed the lawsuit against Ripple, then went to work for Etherium.

Further, Ripple had been consulting with the SEC for years trying to get guidance and compliance while developing their network, and the SEC did a 180 and filed the suit against Ripple 8 years after the fact.

Further, it appears that SEC employees may have been buying, selling, and trading XRP, the currency of Ripple, with clearance from the SEC, because they are not allowed to trade securities while working for the SEC, as a conflict of interest...meaning the SEC did NOT consider XRP a security for 8 years, and then all of a sudden changed their mind and filed the lawsuit, for no apparent reason, other than to benefit Etherium, which was only possible because there is literally nothing written in law or statute defining what specifically makes a crypto a security or not.

They are also filing many other lawsuits against exchanges for selling securities, and then settling for money, and refusing to specify which cryptocurrencies specifically were securities, and which were not, and why.

Therefore, the crypto industry is constanty under threat from the government, not knowing whether they are violating the law or not, and every effort to get guidance is denied.

The crux of the matter is, the United States is one of the least friendly, least desirable nations to create new technologies and new businesses in the crypto asset class on the planet, and thus new projects are establishing themselves in other countries, and existing enterprises are leaving the country, in favor of other nations that have clear regulations and definitions, and aren't trying to attack the industry.

Crypto is creating the 21st century Silicon Valleys and Apple/Microsofts, and they will not be in the United States.

OK, thank you for breaking that down. I just don't see government oversite as any more secure than what they are doing, long-term. The government can and will always change rules and regulations to suit their needs. It happens all the time.

I thought a central characteristic of crypto is that it's anonymous. How is the government sticking its hand in at all? I just really don't understand that part.
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
OK, thank you for breaking that down. I just don't see government oversite as any more secure than what they are doing, long-term. The government can and will always change rules and regulations to suit their needs. It happens all the time.

I thought a central characteristic of crypto is that it's anonymous. How is the government sticking its hand in at all? I just really don't understand that part.

I understand the questions.....I can answer partly....the "anonymous" part is, if you buy your crypto, you download it to your wallet, which has an address...and anybody can go and look at the blockchain and see the transaction, but they only see your wallet address, with no personal info attached to it. You can then send it to me, and all anyone will see is X amount of crypto being transferred from Wallet Y, to wallet Z.

However, exchanges come in two forms....decentralized, and centralized. When you buy from a centralized exchange, of course there are financial records attached...your credit card or whatever.

Thirdly, someone creates the software for the blockchain...and there are names and/or organizations attached to that, generally....not always, it can be done anonymously.

In the case of XRP (the coin), and Ripple....XRP was created by a group of programmers, who then, a couple of months laters, went on to create the company Ripple after the fact....Ripple is essentially a company that uses On Demand Liquidity for bank transactions...so a bank in the US can send money to a bank in Japan by depositing USD, which then gets converted to XRP of equal value, which then gets sent to Japan, and then converted to Yen of equal value, and deposited in the Japan bank. This takes roughly 2-3 seconds, and a certain amount of XRP gets burned in the process...in the amount of some fraction of a penny, so that is the cost of the transaction. So, this is Ripple's business model. Ripple did not technically create XRP, they just use it, though it is the same people. They pay employees in XRP, they fund projects built on the XRP Ledger (the blockchain) using XRP, and they sell XRP on exchanges.

The SEC is thus suing the founders of Ripple for selling XRP as an unregistered security....essentially treating XRP as stock in the company.

Clear as mud?

EDIT: Ripple also has stock, but it is not publicly traded, further confusing the issue.

 
Last edited:

John Galt

Previously johnlocke
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
18,307
Reaction score
8,930
Points
113
Age
49
Location
Galt's Gulch
I understand the questions.....I can answer partly....the "anonymous" part is, if you buy your crypto, you download it to your wallet, which has an address...and anybody can go and look at the blockchain and see the transaction, but they only see your wallet address, with no personal info attached to it. You can then send it to me, and all anyone will see is X amount of crypto being transferred from Wallet Y, to wallet Z.

However, exchanges come in two forms....decentralized, and centralized. When you buy from a centralized exchange, of course there are financial records attached...your credit card or whatever.

Thirdly, someone creates the software for the blockchain...and there are names and/or organizations attached to that, generally....not always, it can be done anonymously.

In the case of XRP (the coin), and Ripple....XRP was created by a group of programmers, who then, a couple of months laters, went on to create the company Ripple after the fact....Ripple is essentially a company that uses On Demand Liquidity for bank transactions...so a bank in the US can send money to a bank in Japan by depositing USD, which then gets converted to XRP of equal value, which then gets sent to Japan, and then converted to Yen of equal value, and deposited in the Japan bank. This takes roughly 2-3 seconds, and a certain amount of XRP gets burned in the process...in the amount of some fraction of a penny, so that is the cost of the transaction. So, this is Ripple's business model. Ripple did not technically create XRP, they just use it, though it is the same people. They pay employees in XRP, they fund projects built on the XRP Ledger (the blockchain) using XRP, and they sell XRP on exchanges.

The SEC is thus suing the founders of Ripple for selling XRP as an unregistered security....essentially treating XRP as stock in the company.

Clear as mud?

EDIT: Ripple also has stock, but it is not publicly traded, further confusing the issue.


My head hurts now. :rofl:

Definitely, something I will be diving considerably deeper into.

Thanks, man.
 

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
5,307
Reaction score
3,268
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
I understand the questions.....I can answer partly....the "anonymous" part is, if you buy your crypto, you download it to your wallet, which has an address...and anybody can go and look at the blockchain and see the transaction, but they only see your wallet address, with no personal info attached to it. You can then send it to me, and all anyone will see is X amount of crypto being transferred from Wallet Y, to wallet Z.

However, exchanges come in two forms....decentralized, and centralized. When you buy from a centralized exchange, of course there are financial records attached...your credit card or whatever.

Thirdly, someone creates the software for the blockchain...and there are names and/or organizations attached to that, generally....not always, it can be done anonymously.

In the case of XRP (the coin), and Ripple....XRP was created by a group of programmers, who then, a couple of months laters, went on to create the company Ripple after the fact....Ripple is essentially a company that uses On Demand Liquidity for bank transactions...so a bank in the US can send money to a bank in Japan by depositing USD, which then gets converted to XRP of equal value, which then gets sent to Japan, and then converted to Yen of equal value, and deposited in the Japan bank. This takes roughly 2-3 seconds, and a certain amount of XRP gets burned in the process...in the amount of some fraction of a penny, so that is the cost of the transaction. So, this is Ripple's business model. Ripple did not technically create XRP, they just use it, though it is the same people. They pay employees in XRP, they fund projects built on the XRP Ledger (the blockchain) using XRP, and they sell XRP on exchanges.

The SEC is thus suing the founders of Ripple for selling XRP as an unregistered security....essentially treating XRP as stock in the company.

Clear as mud?

EDIT: Ripple also has stock, but it is not publicly traded, further confusing the issue.

Wait a second, this sounds like the plot of Office Space.
 

Big/Sky/Fly

We're All In This Psyop Together...
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
52,097
Reaction score
11,613
Points
113
Location
Moonover, Montana
You are conflating a number of things so that this does not make sense.

Crypto is private money, programmable money, that's all. Those who create the money distribute it in various ways, and some keep more than others, to fund development on the blockchain, so every crypto has a different level of centralization, and there are 11,000 of them, give or take.

The applications programmed on the chain may or may not be decentralized.

But to say "crypto claimed to be decentralized" is like saying "water claimed to be good to drink", it's an inanimate object that makes no claims, and water may or may not be good to drink, depending on the source. Without being specific, the statement is just nonsense. You can't take a sip from the Atlantic, or a public swimming pool, and declare that water is not good to drink.
That's exactly how it was rolled out to be...decentralized. At least the claim...
 

patfan64

Generally Aware
Joined
Apr 20, 2006
Messages
7,261
Reaction score
2,510
Points
113
Age
57
Location
Southwestern CT.
So I'm in ground floor with this token. It's part of a much bigger project (eco system). I have a friend who is working as a developer on this project and he's telling me to get more in today. I trust him so I'm going to listen.

Not financial advice just a friendly suggestion.

Website - ViceToken

Telegram - Vice Token Pre Entry Portal | DeFi
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
Seems the Evergrande contagion is hitting every market...and I would expect the worst is yet to come. It will be interesting to see which market recovers more quickly, crypto or the legacy markets.

If anyone here has any money locked up in Tether, USDT, I recommend get out of Tether. There is a fair amount of smoke that some portion of Tether's backing is securities from Evergrande and other Chinese banks. It may or may not be true, but history in the crypto market shows that stablecoins can go to 0 in literally minutes if they get exposed, and why take the chance?
 

John Galt

Previously johnlocke
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
18,307
Reaction score
8,930
Points
113
Age
49
Location
Galt's Gulch

China Declares Cryptocurrency Transactions Illegal, Bitcoin Price Lower​

The move reinforces China’s tough stance, the strongest to date from a major economy against the use of digital currencies​



im-406381

A bitcoin logo with the Chinese flag in the background.​

PHOTO: AVISHEK DAS/ZUMA PRESS
By
Elaine Yu
Updated Sept. 24, 2021 6:44 am ET

China’s central bank said all cryptocurrency-related transactions are illegal, reinforcing the country’s tough stance against digital rivals to government issued money.
In a statement posted on its website on Friday afternoon, the People’s Bank of China said the latest notice was to further prevent the risks surrounding crypto trading and to maintain national security and social stability.
The price of bitcoin fell as much as 5% following the announcement.


Naming bitcoin, ether and tether as examples, the central bank said cryptocurrencies are issued by nonmonetary authorities, use encryption technologies and exist in digital form and should not be circulated and used in the market as currencies.



It also said it is illegal for overseas exchanges to provide services for residents in China through the internet.
China banned cryptocurrency exchanges from operating within its borders several years ago, but individuals in the country have continued to find ways to trade bitcoin and other digital currencies via over-the-counter or peer-to-peer transactions.
In May this year, a powerful Chinese superregulator pledged to crack down on bitcoin trading and energy-intensive mining, helping to send the price of bitcoin tumbling. Financial regulators in the country have also gotten tougher on banks and payment companies and in June ordered them to take a more active role in weeding out crypto-related transactions.
The statement was dated Sept. 15 but it was only posted onto the central bank’s website at 5 p.m. local time on Friday.
 

Big/Sky/Fly

We're All In This Psyop Together...
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
52,097
Reaction score
11,613
Points
113
Location
Moonover, Montana

China Declares Cryptocurrency Transactions Illegal, Bitcoin Price Lower​

The move reinforces China’s tough stance, the strongest to date from a major economy against the use of digital currencies​



im-406381

A bitcoin logo with the Chinese flag in the background.​

PHOTO: AVISHEK DAS/ZUMA PRESS
By
Elaine Yu
Updated Sept. 24, 2021 6:44 am ET

China’s central bank said all cryptocurrency-related transactions are illegal, reinforcing the country’s tough stance against digital rivals to government issued money.
In a statement posted on its website on Friday afternoon, the People’s Bank of China said the latest notice was to further prevent the risks surrounding crypto trading and to maintain national security and social stability.
The price of bitcoin fell as much as 5% following the announcement.


Naming bitcoin, ether and tether as examples, the central bank said cryptocurrencies are issued by nonmonetary authorities, use encryption technologies and exist in digital form and should not be circulated and used in the market as currencies.



It also said it is illegal for overseas exchanges to provide services for residents in China through the internet.
China banned cryptocurrency exchanges from operating within its borders several years ago, but individuals in the country have continued to find ways to trade bitcoin and other digital currencies via over-the-counter or peer-to-peer transactions.
In May this year, a powerful Chinese superregulator pledged to crack down on bitcoin trading and energy-intensive mining, helping to send the price of bitcoin tumbling. Financial regulators in the country have also gotten tougher on banks and payment companies and in June ordered them to take a more active role in weeding out crypto-related transactions.
The statement was dated Sept. 15 but it was only posted onto the central bank’s website at 5 p.m. local time on Friday.
This happened a while ago...they booted out all of the miners at least a few weeks ago.
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
 

Baron Samedi

Russian Bot 762X54R
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
30,200
Reaction score
4,250
Points
113
Age
53
Location
Framingham
Oct 01, 2021 8:15 AM ET

Legal Newswire POWERED BY LAW.COM

New York, Oct. 1, 2021--
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP is pleased to announce that the SEC is dropping the case against the cryptocurrency company Ripple Labs, Inc.

Mary Jo White shares the results of her most recent discussions with the SEC ". I knew that when they sued Ripple, the agency had spent years investigating without finding anything that would justify this lawsuit. Now, months into it without compelling evidence, and considerable opposition even from inside, my previous co-workers have let me know that they’d be dropping the case in favour of Ripple. These are exciting news not only for Ripple, but for the entire cryptocurrency space.”

The SEC had sued Ripple Labs, its CEO Brad Garlinghouse, and co-founder Chris Larsen alleging that Ripple labs had sold unregistered securities for years in December 2020.

They claim that the cryptocurrency issued by Ripple Labs: XRP was a security, and therefore would have to comply with much stricter regulations. The agency hopes to forfeit the money raised through the initial sale of XRP, stop Garlinghouse and Larsen from further selling the cryptocurrency, and impose additional fines.

To date, the definition of security in the legal sense is based on the Howey Test, which establishes four criteria to determine whether an asset is a security. Ultimately, it boils down to if expected profits are derived from the effort of others.

When it comes to classification as a security, the case against Ripple could have percussions for the entire cryptocurrency industry. Even Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano, stepped in and offered his take on the situation. He believes that XRP, albeit potentially close to the legal definition, isn't a security because even if the SEC shut the company down and arrested both executives, the ledger would continue existing.

At the end of July, William Hinman's deposition to the SEC v. Ripple lawsuit took place. Details of it have yet to be made publicly available. Still, experts believe that Hinman's statements might be against classifying Ripple as a Security, as Hinman is known for classifying Ether as not a security in his previous role as Director of Corporation at the SEC.

In the most recent development, 13 entries counted as internal SEC documents have been removed from the public view after the SEC filed a motion to protect said documents. For the Ripple Army (the ripple community), this counted as a sign of the SEC having something to hide.

With 2 out of 5 SEC commissioners Hester Peirce and Elad Roisman, stating publicly that the SEC lacks clarity in the crypto space and positioning themselves on the defendant's side, the SEC stood more and more on thin ice.

The SEC dropping the case against Ripple, provides reassurance for other crypto companies, and leaves leeway for further innovation in the industry.

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP is a leading international law firm representing a wide range of clients in transactions and disputes around the world. Founded in 1931, the firm has offices in New York, Washington, D.C., London, Paris, Frankfurt, Moscow, Hong Kong, and Shanghai.
URL : Home | Debevoise & Plimpton LLP




Contact Information:​

Greer Hunter
ghunter@debevoise-laws.com



 
Top