Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bitcoin and NFTs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Comment


      Tezos bunfight update. I found this particularly amusing:
      “After months of incapacitating interference, obstruction, and attacks, the Tezos Foundation has regained the ability to act,” he wrote. “In a high-trust environment, the impossible becomes possible. In a low-trust environment, even the possible becomes impossible.”
      Isn't the whole point of crypto to facilitate transactions in a trustless environment?

      Comment


        Courtesy of Matt Levine, the first SEC registered ICO. He highlights this disclaimer:
        To the maximum extent permitted by the applicable laws, regulations and rules the Company and/or the Distributor shall not be liable for any indirect, special, incidental, consequential, or other losses of any kind, in tort, contract, tax or otherwise (including but not limited to loss of revenue, income or profits, and loss of use or data), arising out of or in connection with any acceptance of or reliance on this Prospectus or any part thereof by you.
        You can't actually do that, right? I mean, the whole point of a prospectus is to have something you can legally rely on. It's literally an inducement to buy, with a legally prescribed form.


        The Company and/or the Distributor does not make or purport to make, and hereby disclaims, any representation, warranty or undertaking in any form whatsoever to any entity or person, including any representation, warranty or undertaking in relation to the truth, accuracy, and completeness of any of the information set out in this Prospectus.
        Similarly, this cannot be legally sound, can it? I mean, in Europe, the Prospectus Directive requires prospectuses to be be accurate, complete and not misleading. Surely there's something equivalent for SEC registrations (like Sarbox?). Or is it just covered by general fraud law?

        Comment


          There isn’t a law against such disclaimers, but they are unlikely to be given legal effect in the event of litigation.

          The securities fraud standard is in Rule 10b-5, which dates back to the 30s and sanctions “material misstatements or omissions”

          Comment


            Oh man, this is a doozy. I love that it's two completely unrelated businesses (neither of which, you know, exist) requiring completely different resources and expertise, slapped together for no other reason than BLOCKCHAIN. The whole thing seems to be a wheeze to get some money to invest in dodgy New York real estate. And also make "commercial private loans" to persons unknown, because reasons. None of this has any reason to be crypto related other than that there's a lot of money sloshing around in crypto. The tokens will represent some sort of profit participation (seemingly in the rental income from the properties, but not the interest from the loans?), but at the company's complete discretion. And then there's the usual crypto debit card pitch. This does at least make sense for an ICO, but the projections are pretty hilarious. Apparently their long term goal is a credit card which will somehow magically charge a third as much interest as ordinary credit cards. I'm struggling to see how that would even cover their cost of funds, let alone charge-offs and operating costs.

            Also, the leadership team photos are amazeballs.

            Comment


              The headquarters address could literally be their mom's basement.

              I assume that Cousin Vinny is issuers' counsel

              Comment


                Oh dear.

                How sad.

                What a pity.

                Never mind.

                https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...P=share_btn_tw



                On Reddit earlier this week, one contributor, under the heading “I just discovered that I owe the IRS $50k that I don’t have, because I traded in cryptos. Am I fucked?”, wrote they had ended up with a $50,000 tax liability on trades after they sold $120,000 worth of bitcoin to buy different coins. The current value of those coins is about $30,000. “I feel like I might have accidentally ruined my life because I didn’t know about the taxes,” the poster wrote. One complication for crypto investors is that digital currencies that were, in part, devised to operate outside of government and banking industry oversight, are still of interest to the US tax authorities, who look at cryptocurrency as property and not currency.

                oops!

                Comment


                  Placing responsibility on the individual to report taxable income is, of course, in keeping with the libertarian perspective of crypto-world. “So on one side, yeah, it’s been easy to avoid tax, but on the other it’s part of the crypto ethos of personal responsibility to own up to it,” Perez says.
                  Hahahaha. Yeah, those libertarians, always going on about their personal responsibility to pay the tax they owe.

                  Comment


                    The Easyjet in-flight magazine was full of bitcoin ads. And they made it to the advertising hoardings in the Premier League recently, too. So we're firmly in the "sucker" phase.

                    Comment


                      This is a downside to blockchain that I hadn't even considered

                      Comment


                        oops!

                        https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...llegal-content



                        Child abuse imagery found within bitcoin's blockchain



                        Researchers discover illegal content within the distributed ledger, making possession of it potentially unlawful in many countries




                        “Our analysis shows that certain content, eg, illegal pornography, can render the mere possession of a blockchain illegal,” the researchers wrote. “Although court rulings do not yet exist, legislative texts from countries such as Germany, the UK, or the USA suggest that illegal content such as [child abuse imagery] can make the blockchain illegal to possess for all users.”


                        Oh. Bothery!
                        Last edited by Guy Profumo; 20-03-2018, 16:33. Reason: (Too late. Apologies to GY)

                        Comment


                          https://twitter.com/maxwelltani/status/976926310445584386?s=21

                          Comment


                            I don't think the controversy had anything to do with whether Bannon was being paid. No platforming isn't about compensation.

                            Comment


                              Correct, especially in this case.

                              In the US university context, the use of compulsory “student activity fees” to pay speakers has sometimes been a secondary issue.

                              Comment


                                Comment


                                  You're so money, BTC.

                                  Comment


                                    There is no single person in existence who had a problem they wanted to solve, discovered that an available blockchain solution was the best way to solve it, and therefore became a blockchain enthusiast.
                                    From this entertaining piece

                                    Comment


                                      Well, apart from scammers whose problem was not having money.

                                      Comment


                                        Even the most die-hard crypto enthusiasts prefer in practice to rely on trust rather than their own crypto-medieval systems. 93% of bitcoins are mined by managed consortiums, yet none of the consortiums use smart contracts to manage payouts. Instead, they promise things like a “long history of stable and accurate payouts.” Sounds like a trustworthy middleman!


                                        Same with Silk Road, a cryptocurrency-driven online drug bazaar. The key to Silk Road wasn’t the bitcoins (that was just to evade government detection), it was the reputation scores that allowed people to trust criminals. And the reputation scores weren’t tracked on a tamper-proof blockchain, they were tracked by a trusted middleman!
                                        This is a very good point.

                                        Comment


                                          This is an interesting pitch. "Hey, you know Tether? It's probably a fraud. Well, our thing is like Tether, but totally not a fraud, we promise!"

                                          Comment


                                            Just what one would expect from a "Chief Visionary" . ..

                                            Comment


                                              https://twitter.com/businessinsider/status/985917345519595521?s=21

                                              Comment


                                                Fuck the fuck off. I want the wee scrote Locked away in Juvenile Hall, the pocket sized Ponzi wee bam.

                                                Comment


                                                  NY AG investigating crypto exchanges:
                                                  The questionnaires ask the platforms to disclose information falling within six major topic areas, including (1) Ownership and Control, (2) Basic Operation and Fees, (3) Trading Policies and Procedures, (4) Outages and Other Suspensions of Trading, (5) Internal Controls, and (6) Privacy and Money Laundering. Among other areas of interest, the questionnaires request that platforms describe their approach to combating suspicious trading and market manipulation; their policies on the operation of bots; their limitations on the use of and access to non-public trading information; and the safeguards they have in place to protect customer funds from theft, fraud, and other risks. The Attorney General’s office will analyze the responses, compare them across platforms, and at the conclusion of this process, present what it learned to the public.

                                                  The Investor Protection Bureau of the Office of the Attorney General sent letters to the following virtual currency trading platforms: (1) Coinbase, Inc. (GDAX); (2) Gemini Trust Company; (3) bitFlyer USA, Inc.; (4) iFinex Inc. (Bitfinex); (5) Bitstamp USA Inc.; (6) Payward, Inc. (Kraken); (7) Bittrex, Inc.; (8) Circle Internet Financial Limited (Poloniex LLC); (9) Binance Limited; (10) Elite Way Developments LLP (Tidex.com); (11) Gate Technology Incorporated (Gate.io); (12) itBit Trust Company; and (13) Huobi Global Limited (Huobi.Pro)

                                                  Comment


                                                    Also, quality chutzpah from CA:
                                                    Prior to the Facebook controversy, we were developing a suite of technologies to help individuals reclaim their personal data from corporate entities and to have full transparency and control over how their personal data are used,” a Cambridge Analytica spokesman said in an email to Reuters. “We were exploring multiple options for people to manage and monetise their personal data, including blockchain technology.”

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X