CZ’s Response to the CFTC Complaint Today, the CFTC filed an unexpected and disappointing civil complaint, despite our working cooperatively with the CFTC for over two years. Upon an initial review, the complaint appears to contain an incomplete recitation of facts, and we do not agree with the characterization of many of the issues alleged in the complaint. While we will only be able to give full responses in due time, we will address a few key points below. Good for him for a quick and detailed response, but the effort is probably futile. At this point, the message is pretty clear, US want to chase Binance of their market (or maybe from other markets in countries under US influence). Possibly only as part of the wider crack down on crypto, or maybe as an element of USA Vs China game of economical dominance. The way it looks like, doesn't matter what Binance will do in terms of compliance. They'll always find a way to hit them. |
|
|
|
Players shouldn't really try to cheat in any form just so they could take advantage of the casinos benefit whether if it's a vulnerability or not. But of course, not everyone has the same moral compass so we could only remind them about the repercussions of cheating.
Cheating on a casino or any gambling platforms is considered a grave offense. Most of the time this is already stated in their TOS and the punishment is will depend on what they deem necessary such as suspension of banning of the account. In an instance it is proven that a player cheated, they can no longer access their account nor make any transaction on it to recover what's left. Hence, it should be an enough warning to everyone.
No one should be cheating, either in casino or generally in life, but the same rule should apply to both sides, not only to players. I think too many players are too tolerant of some shady and dishonest practices by some gambling site operators (or maybe even to a bigger degree - physical casinos), i.e. banning people without stating any reason or offering games with absolutely no information on the house edge etc. Not to mention they would often resort to psychological tricks to make games more addictive or to get the players drunk with free drinks, which says a lot about how immoral they can get. Remember - they need you way more than you need them, and, for most players, getting banned by a casino could actually be a good thing. |
|
|
|
How naive a person needs to be to hope that the tax office of another country will not notice the purchase of real estate by a foreign citizen and will not ask his source of financing.
Georgia is a very good country with a good climate, but in order to live there, you need to take into account many nuances. Therefore, I always advise legalizing income through a business in your country.
If they allow foreigners to purchase properties, then don't have any interest in checking how did they get the funds, as any taxes would be payable in other jurisdictions anyway, so nothing to gain for them. Not to mention they don't have any authority to launch any routine investigations in foreign countries, so even if they asked you for the source of funds, they'd probably accept any answer. So not sure how do you imagine the process would look like? Do you think they'd auto-appoint a financial forensic investigator for every house sale? Again, we're talking about purchasing with fiat with a fiat bank transfer from abroad. Between the countries there are treaties on tax control. Nobody will prevent you from buying a house or other real estate, because you are making investments in the country. And after the purchase, the tax office has several years or more to check the legality of your funds with which you bought the house. If there is no such procedure today, this does not mean that next year it will be the same. Fair enough, but was a bit puzzled when you called me "naive" for writing what you essentially wrote yourself: the country you're buying property in, is unlikely to prevent you from doing that as you're pumping money into their economy. If anyone was to launch any investigation, usually some sort of red flag would have to be triggered and I'm guessing the country doing the investigation would most likely to be a country of your tax residence. In many countries, there are tax treaties that prevent double taxation, which means that, depending on the details of the tax treaty, someone who earns income in one country but resides in another country may still be required to pay taxes in both countries.
Preventing double taxation would mean you'd only be taxed by one country (in regard to personal income tax), e.g. your country of tax residency could let you deduct any taxes paid on your property owned in a foreign country. |
|
|
|
W zasadzie to mogę zaproponować zakład, że nie zobaczymy do końca kwietnia ceny btc na żadnej poważnej giełdzie powyżej 32k usd (na 30+ szanse zresztą oceniam też na bardzo bardzo mierne, więc też bym obstawiał, że cena nie utrzyma się na poziomie ponad 30k dłuzej niż dajmy na to 4godziny), proponuje symboliczne 1mBTC (0,001BTC)
Wydaje mi się że masz rację, ale chętnie przyjmę zakład dla zabawy, ale o to że dojdzie do 30k (a nie 32k). Daj znać czy akceptujesz w przeciągu kilku dni (powiedzmy do końca Marca). PS. Czy dobrze widzę, że moja odpowiedź jest tysięczną?  1001-szą  trochę się spożniłeś. Szansa na następnego jubileuszowego posta dopiero na 10.000 heh
Nowy tydzień i nowy atak na Binance: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2023/03/27/bitcoin-sinks-below-27k-after-cftc-files-suit-against-binance/Tym razem przez Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) |
|
|
|
This kind of announcement is not new. I think every now and then SEC gives a warning to crypto investors especially when the cryptocurrency market is getting bullish. Now that they have CBDC I believe SEC will be more aggressive in their propaganda to discredit the cryptocurrency industry, especially these stablecoins to kill competition and will possibly promote or suggest CBDC as a better replacement.
I believe once the preparation for CBDC is complete (study, laws, regulation. technology), SEC will launch more thorough propaganda that can defame cryptocurrency and promote CBDC.
Yup. I see their statement as "don't say we didn't warn you" kind of thing when they crack down on crypto even harder and might singlehandedly cause a crypto-market collapse (off course to protect the investors from losses lol). They've already attacked Coinbase and Paxos for issuing BUSD (with a help of NYDFS). Still failing to clearly define what the "security" is and how can they possibly view some stablecoins as securities if they offer no promises of profits. GOP Sen. Ted Cruz Proposes Ban on a CBDC Good to hear. But I fear it's just a publicity stunt with no chance of getting passed. Hope I'm wrong. Now today we got CTFC suing Binanace. It seems this is not going to end soon. If you read the lawsuit, most likely it means that Binance US is dead and most likely it will be impossible to use any US banks to transfer USD into and out of the Binance exchange.
It's hard not to notice that Binance is particularly targeted by US authorities. The rumour is Binance has a secret support of Chinese government, and as such, US will do anything not to allow them to get any dominant position in the crypto market in the US. |
|
|
|
According to Zodiac, " ETH transactions are currently and have been offline for a few hours. It should be back in an hour as they are currently critically low on space for our ETH wallet and moving things to free up space " So you're telling me that Zodiac, the co-owner of the site, is also active in operating the site? From the previous conversations, I understood that he was more of a "silent" co-owner. If he is - that's pretty good news and could mean that not everything is dependant on LL. When did he post that and where? Was it in the Bitvest chat? |
|
|
|
JUST IN: Senator Mike Lee introduces the “No Central Bank Digital Currency Act”🙌
Is he trying to get assassinated? Because that's how you get assassinated. |
|
|
|
They handled it perfectly with hourly updates and clear, technical information on what exactly went wrong + their ETA of recovery was accurate. That's pretty impressive. So far, Binance has managed to turn every unfortunate event (like this one, BUSD regulatory issues or previous hacks etc) in their favour and increase its credibility. That being said, do not keep your funds on any exchange unless you really have to. |
|
|
|
How naive a person needs to be to hope that the tax office of another country will not notice the purchase of real estate by a foreign citizen and will not ask his source of financing.
Georgia is a very good country with a good climate, but in order to live there, you need to take into account many nuances. Therefore, I always advise legalizing income through a business in your country.
If they allow foreigners to purchase properties, then don't have any interest in checking how did they get the funds, as any taxes would be payable in other jurisdictions anyway, so nothing to gain for them. Not to mention they don't have any authority to launch any routine investigations in foreign countries, so even if they asked you for the source of funds, they'd probably accept any answer. So not sure how do you imagine the process would look like? Do you think they'd auto-appoint a financial forensic investigator for every house sale? Again, we're talking about purchasing with fiat with a fiat bank transfer from abroad. |
|
|
|
"Exercise Caution with Crypto Asset Securities: Investor Alert"https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/exercise-caution-crypto-asset-securities-investor-alert
TLDR: The SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy continues to urge investors to be cautious if considering an investment involving crypto asset securities. Investments in crypto asset securities can be exceptionally volatile and speculative, and the platforms where investors buy, sell, borrow, or lend these securities may lack important protections for investors. The risk of loss for individual investors who participate in transactions involving crypto assets, including crypto asset securities, remains significant. The only money you should put at risk with any speculative investment is money you can afford to lose entirely. This whole statement sounds innocent and, in a sense, as pretty good and sensible advice to investors, but is probably an indication of future actions relating to US crypto crack-down. Bitcoin doesn't seem to be in a direct thread, but if they go after stablecoins (to kill the competition and make a room for CBDC) the entire market will likely get hit.
|
|
|
|
I wasn't very fond of Coin Bureau youtube channel for them being notorious in shilling various altcoins, but they seemed to improve a lot and are doing pretty solid homework on legal and regulatory issues relating to Bitcoin and crypto in general. Here's their recent video on (crypto-friendly) Signature Bank, which shows some nuances that you won't hear in the mainstream media and is related to the wider crypto crack-down (aka operation Choke Point 2.0) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YZ6TG3iXKUShort summary (generated by Merlin tool): ✦ Signature Bank, the final pro-crypto bank in the US, was shut down by regulators despite being solvent. ✦ Signature bank developed Signet, a platform to transfer US Dollars 24/7 for its crypto clients. ✦ Signet and Silvergate are two pro-crypto banks with overlapping client bases, but differences in their service offerings. ✦ Signature Bank shut down by NYDFS, causing huge issues for crypto companies. ✦ Regulators targeted Signature Bank due to its Signet platform. ✦ The FED may be threatened by private sector competition. ✦ US regulators are targeting stablecoins as their final crypto competitor to crush. ✦ Global Crackdown on crypto may happen this summer. Really good watch and puts things into perspective. |
|
|
|
to chyba nie chodzi o ten FTX ?
Tak to ten, dokładnie... teraz nie wiem czy to żart, czy masz takie zaległości? Jeżeli to nie żart i byłeś gdzies odcięty od świata (jak to sie mówi, mieszkałeś gdzies pod kamieniem?) Spokojnie, Adam pewnie pytał czy to o ten FTX chodziło czy może o coś innego z przypadkowo taką samą nazwą. A jeśli nie wiedział, to też nic złego. Czasem dobrze jest się odciąć na jakiś czas i odpocząć mentalnie. Natomiast ja jestem ciekaw takiej rzeczy, gdyby założmy padły wszystkie stable na trwałe, a banki dalej ograniczałyby możliwośc zakupu btc za fiaty, jaki to miałoby wpływ na wycene btc?
Ciężko mi sobie wyobrazić sytuację gdzie wszystkie stable padają. Wystarczy że znajdzie się choć jeden kraj który da zielone światło i luka na rynku się szybko zapełni. Bardziej chodzi o ewentualny zakaz handlu stablami przez USA. Jeśli to nastąpi to prawdopodobnie żeby pozbyć się konkurencji dla CBDC. Pytanie czy miałby za tym iść całkowity zakaz handlu kryptowalutami. Gdyby tak się miało stać to cena na pewno dostała by mocno po tyłku. Potem może by się jakoś odbiła, w zależności ile innych krajów by taki zakaz również wprowadziło a ile by pozwoliło na taki handel - czyli czy rynek miałby możliwość przeniesienia się gdzie indziej. troche dziwne, rozumiem pozwy za reklamowanie oczywistych scamów, ale tutaj wsztystko wygladało ok nawet dla wielu VC, hedge funds i armii tłustych inwestorów, a nawet sam SEC, więc polowanie na cwelebrytów, sam nie wiem...
Zgoda. Też uważam że jeśli ktoś nie był świadomy że coś było oszustwem to nie powinien ponosić odpowiedzialności. I tak karą będzie skaza na reputacji i obniżenie przyszłych zdolności zarobkowych. W sumie taka sama sytuacja jak z zarabianiem w kampaniach sygnatur. Nie mam możliwości poznania intencji reklamodawców, i nie czuje się odpowiedzialny za potencjalne scamy, no chyba że dalej coś reklamuję mimo że mam silne przesłanki że coś jest nie tak. W sumie to całkiem dobre ostrzeżenie. Opisuje ryzyka i zaleca inwestowanie "tyle ile jest się w stanie stracić". Spodziewałem się czegoś bardziej agresywnego. Zaleceń uciekania póki jest z czego, bo zaczynamy wojnę z nieuregulowanymi securities.
Pamiętaj że oni nigdy nie powiedzą wprost o co im chodzi. Nie patrz na ton, ten zawsze będzię pełen "troski" o dobro finansowe obywateli Ale jak się wczytać to za wiele nowego nie tłumaczą. Brzmi to trochę jak taka "podkładka" żeby potem móc powiedzieć: "przecież ostrzegaliśmy", na wypadek załamania rynku spowodowanego właśnie przez SEC. 1. Those offering crypto asset investments or services may not be complying with applicable law, including federal securities laws A my dalej nie wiemy jak jakikolwiek stablecoin może podchodzić pod security jeżeli nie ma tam obietnicy zysku. Wręcz przeciwnie, jest obietnica straty spowodowana inflacją. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcointalk Account: pawel7777
My vote goes to: Cantsay
But seriously, well done to all participants! Proud of you all
|
|
|
|
Tax Avoidance Possible but in a few countries. Depends of your passport and residence too. For example Georgia - 0 fees on crypto income, but it can changed in any time. Passport - you should declare your income in your country of residence.
One of the option is: Come to the country where there are crypto exchanger (like Georgia - Tbilisi, i heard also there are a few in Turkey), send them crypto and get cash.
Anyway - the more totalitarian government (USA, EU for example in my opinion) you have the less chance to explain where did u get funds. The less "formed" government you have then easier to explain the source of income \ hide income
Even if you change the cryptocurrency in Georgia, it will not help you. If you want to buy real estate in Georgia, then the tax office may ask you for a source of financing. The cash withdrawal limit from Georgia is no more than $10,000. Cryptocurrency can be exchanged for cash without problems in most countries, but it is much more difficult to legalize income. I don't think Georgian authorities would care that much about the source of your income when buying a house if you are not a tax resident in Georgia. Probably if you transferred money from a foreign bank account it wouldn't be a problem, but maybe it would raise some red flags if all the funding came from crypto exchange to fiat locally. Nevertheless, traveling to countries like Georgia just to exchange bitcoins won't help at all in terms of tax liability, and could cause some problems as it'd look suspicious as hell. The only solution would be to move to Georgia and stay there long enough to become a tax resident, assuming your home country won't double-tax you anyway. There are few countries, incl. US that tax their citizens even if they permanently live abroad. |
|
|
|
Widać ze ceny powoli odbijają, BTC juz znowu na 27500 i walczy na oporze...
No i wszystko nie tylko wróciło do normy ale tron poszedl nawet ponad 10% w gorę przez ostatnie 24 godziny. Wygląda jakby rynek wyrobił sobie grubą skórę i nieco uodpornił się na te wszystkie groźby regulatorów. co Wy na to? widać ze SEC wziął się za crypto po FTX, chyba 2023 bedzie rokiem "być albo nie być" dla wielu altcoinów, jak nie dla całego krypto świata?
No tak w sumie to po latach trzymania wszystkich w niepewności, wypadałoby żeby SEC konkretnie i czysto określił co wg nich jest security a co nie jest. Nie wydaje mi się żeby chcieli totalnie zarżnąć cały rynek krypto w USA, więc pewnie nie póją tak daleko jak zdelegalizowanie handlu większości altcoinów, ale gdzieś jakąś granicę bedą musieli wyznaczyć. Bitcoin może spać spokojnie. Choć nie wiadomo jak ewentualne spadki altcoinów wpłyną na jego cenę. Na dwoje babka wróżyła. „...Ponadto SEC postawił zarzuty ośmiu znanym celebrytom za nielegalne propagowanie TRX i BTT bez ujawnienia, że otrzymali za to wynagrodzenie. Wśród nich są godne uwagi osoby, takie jak aktorka Lindsay Lohan, osobowość medialna Jake Paul, raper DeAndre Cortez Way — znany również jako Soulja Boy — piosenkarz Austin Mahone i czterech innych celebrytów..."
I tu się robi ciekawie. To chyba pierwszy raz gdy ktoś pociąga cwelebrytów do jakiejkolwiek odpowiedzialności za reklamę. Ciekawe czy też wezmą się za tych, którzy reklamowali FTX.
Edit: Dzisiejsze ostrzeżenie SEC dla inwestorów: https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/exercise-caution-crypto-asset-securities-investor-alert |
|
|
|
I have been "trying" to push through a small non-crucial transaction for 2$ at a fee rate of 1 sat/vbyte. I think it has been like 6 days already. I am already missing those nights I could send the cheapest as possible without having to worry about getting my stuff rejected. Alas, one truly does not know what one has, until one loses it. Not gonna lie, I am feeling quite tempted to diversify my portfolio with some Litecoin in order to cope with this, until gets more bearable (assuming it won't get worse, though). Luckily most wallets would have the option to bump the fee and push the transaction through. I'm surprised that yours hasn't been rejected after 6 days. Can anyone explain how/when low-fee transactions get rejected from the mempool? I don't suppose there's a fixed time, but probably more of new transactions pushing out the old ones when the mempool is full etc? Or will most wallets keep re-broadcasting it until it gets confirmed? |
|
|
|
I think it would be impossible for AI to beat casino. No matter how powerful AI is it is the casino that wins and earns the profit. But I think casinos also consider this one and I doubt that they don't take any action to make sure that casino wins over AI.
Depends on what exactly you mean by "casino" I guess. If we're talking about a place that only offers classic casino games with the mathematical advantage being on the side of the house, then AI would be useless. But if we're talking about games that have judgemental odds, i.e. sports games, then AI could be very handy in running advanced analysis to find good betting opportunities. It could also be good for finding any potential exploits. But the main area where AI would be most effective is playing against human players in games like poker. But we've known this for a while now. |
|
|
|
My experience with this platform has gone very well since starting. Also, I am glad that OP is still active here on this thread.
It is one of the most user-friendly platforms I've seen so far. With them, good luck and further success in the future as well. Keep it up, guys.
Same, don't have much time for poker nowadays, but never had any negative experience at SwC. They're the oldest bitcoin poker site, so good to see they're still around despite some bumps on the way like the Bryan Micon's situation. OP returned after an almost 2 years long absence, so hopefully this is a sign of good things to come. |
|
|
|
I dont know why discussions such as this still persist because we are already used to such shill accounts coming up with baseless accusations from time to time, and since the admin here is generally unavailable spammers find the thread as the spill ground.
You don't know if it was baseless accusations or not. Those things happen occasionally, mostly to a depleted hot wallet. The guy just made a post thinking this thread is monitored by the admin etc. And apart from that one, we haven't really seen any other posts like that, so probably nothing to worry about. |
|
|
|
The only thing is sports betting that gives a person a little bit of advantage is if they do some research and analysis, that will increase their chances of winning a bet, but even after that, there is no guarantee and as you said, the result can always surprise you.
Not quite, no amount of research and analysis will guarantee you a win. The key is to use a better analysis than sports betting sites and spot opportunities where, in your opinion, they miscalculated the odds and set the payout rate higher than it should be. It's not as hard as it sounds though, and such opportunities are not as rare as one would think. From my observation, they occur most often in combat sports (boxing, MMA), e.g. recent UFC Edwards Vs Usman fight. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
