137 irrelevant posts deleted in 2 days!

Post Deletion Completed (Still Open for More)

Bloomberg Business
https://www.youtube.com/user/Bloomberg

Sneakers
Antitrust
Swordfish
Green Miles
Forrest Gump

What's a Former CIA Lawyer Doing in Crypto?



Russell Bruemmer is taking it upon himself to help token issuers construct compliant initial coin offerings (ICOs).

While that might sound challenging in a space where the regulatory framework has not been formalized, Bruemmer is as prepared as anyone could be in his new role advising blockchain startup Applied Philosophy Labs (APL).

A former top lawyer of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the former lead of the congressional affairs unit at the FBI, Bruemmer gained the relevant experience working for decades at for the law firm of WilmerHale, helping traditional companies structure their corporate governance.

In recent years, he said, he was approached by a number of blockchain entrepreneurs trying to figure out if the token they wanted to issue was a security or not.

As a result, by the time he retired from the firm in 2015, he had laid the foundation for his work advising startups more broadly.

"[Bruemmer] seemed like exactly what I needed in the new venture," said APL founder David Levine.

In a climate where the Securities and Exchange Commission has been cracking down on crypto token fundraising schemes, Bruemmer knows he has his work cut out for him.

At APL specifically, he has helped the public benefit corporation draw up plans for a network of humanitarian companies that would sit underneath the parent entity and issue regulated cryptocurrency tokens.

To fund the humanitarian companies, he helped create a template to comply with the SEC's Reg CF and Reg A+. The hope is that, eventually, this compliant structure will define a path to public offerings via an S-1 filing and S-3 filing.

Bruemmer told CoinDesk:

    "We are using corporate and governance structures that will be familiar to, and thus comfortable for, our investors. This is another aspect of our intention to be transparent with our investors and regulators who have jurisdiction over our activities."

And the first company that gets the treatment is solar power startup Indeco.


A power play

Indeco was one of the reasons Bruemmer was intrigued with APL in the first place, he told CoinDesk, since he already had an interest in how a compliant crypto token could incentivize the adoption of solar power.

And so the crew got started.

Speaking to Bruemmer's insight, Levine told CoinDesk:

    "Within a couple hours, we had mapped out the whole plan on how to build a regulatory compliant crypto."

For Indeco's ICO, people can purchase an ethereum-based ERC-20 token pegged to a single watt of solar capacity. They are then being offered an ownership stake in assets installed with the funds, including solar panels, batteries and microgrids for decentralized energy distribution.

"We've evolved from cryptocurrencies which are based solely on algorithms and trading values, etc. into something like Indeco, where the coin is actually going to equate to something that is more tangible," said Bruemmer, who now sits on Indeco's board.

Earlier this month the company completed a $100,000 presale, as part of a broader ICO governed by Reg A+ that could eventually see the firm raising $50 million.

"If it works … you will expand the amount of solar energy being produced by bringing together groups of people who can invest small amounts, not huge amounts, and then aggregate those small amounts and build systems that can then sell energy either to a utility or to a customer," Bruemmer said.

Although APL was originally designed to house what are called "series LLCs," each with its own token, due to tax considerations the final structure of the subsidiaries could end up shifting to C Corps, which can offer unlimited stocks.


Investor resistance

If all that structuring doesn't sound complicated enough, Indeco's backstory is equally, if not more, complex.

Prior to founding APL and Indeco, Levine founded Geostellar, a solar power startup like Indeco, except without the blockchain.

By 2016, Geostellar was generating $3.6 million in annual revenue and had raised $27 million in venture capital, but even still, Levine was having trouble keeping the company going.

To help put the company on more solid footing, Levine says he spent about $500,000 on legal fees, accounting fees and more last year, in an effort to raise $40 million in an ICO governed under Reg A+.

But the company's secured creditors pushed back, Levine said.

"They could block us from doing almost anything," he said. "And they were sending me cease-and-desist letters on the ICO, claiming they had to consent as our secured creditors."

Levine was able to sidestep Geostellar's creditors' concerns by offering a Simple Agreement for Future Equity (SAFE) on the equity crowdfunding site Republic (which recently began managing token sales).

As part of the crowdfunding campaign, the company offered to those investors cryptocurrency called "zydeco," among other gifts including a "shoutout" on Facebook and a solar-powered happy hour.

Levine raised $325,000 during that promotion.

"The secured creditors and investors were challenging my authority to even offer free tokens, and generally criticizing everything I did," Levine said, adding, "Of course it turned out to be a huge success."

Now Geostellar will be Indeco's first customer, Levine told CoinDesk. Which is one more client than most blockchain startups can boast.

Then again, a struggling company with the same founder is not exactly an ideal source of revenue. Bruemmer, who chairs the conflict and audit committees of APL's board of directors, would not comment on Geostellar's history of financial struggles.

But Levine said having the legal veteran on board will help Indeco navigate such complexities, telling CoinDesk:

    "Things were going to get weird, and we needed someone brilliant, unflappable, experienced and credible."



Source: https://www.coindesk.com/whats-former-cia-lawyer-crypto-structuring-compliant-icos/

South Korea Announces Deadline for Halt of Anonymous Crypto Trading



South Korea's financial watchdog has set a deadline for the barring of anonymous cryptocurrency trading accounts within the country.

According to a new announcement from the Financial Services Commission (FSC), starting from Jan. 30, cryptocurrency investors in South Korea will have to use real-name bank accounts in order to continue trading.

Once the rule comes into effect, investors can only deposit funds to trade cryptocurrencies if their name on the crypto exchange matches that on their bank account.

The move comes as part of the financial regulator's push through a strengthened "know-your-customer" (KYC) compliance to curb cryptocurrency speculation. The FSC said in the release that the new rule is resulted from an inspection of domestic anonymous crypto trading accounts – assisted by six domestic banks, as well as the Financial Intelligence Unit – from Jan. 8–16.

In addition, the official announcement also established an anti-money laundering guideline for cryptocurrency exchanges, which outlines situations where exchanges should stay alert to potential illegal activity.

The statement said:

    "Specifically, for users to make virtual currency transactions more than 10 million won per day or more than 20 million won for 7 days when depositing and withdrawing funds, this is the type of financial transaction you suspect for money laundering."

The new rule also appears to have a wider affect on foreign nationals who had been using cryptocurrency exchanges in South Korea through a virtual bank account. As the FSC's announcement pointed out, minors and non-citizens will be restricted from the new name verification service.

So far, three major cryptocurrency exchanges in South Korea have said they are in line with the new mandate.

In an email response to CoinDesk, a representative from Coinone confirmed that it will enforce the change starting from Jan. 30. "Under the new requirement, six banks are preparing the real-name account linkage with exchanges. They are NongHyup, KookMin, Shinhan, KEBHana, IBK, and JB Bank. As for Coinone, our users have to be registered with NongHyup for the time being," the company said.

In addition, in its official blog post, Korbit also said on Jan. 19 that the existing fund deposit method will be terminated and replaced this month. It added that users "must have a Shinhan Bank account registered under your legal name."

According to a report from South Korean news agency Yonhap, the Bithumb exchange also said it will also enforce the new change as per the government's requirement.


Source: https://www.coindesk.com/south-korea-announces-deadline-for-halt-of-anonymous-crypto-trading/

Coinbase Overshoots 2017 Revenue Goal By 66% Making $1 Bln, Rejects Further VC Funding



America’s largest cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase reportedly made $1 billion in revenue in 2017, overshooting its 2017 revenue forecast of $600 mln by 66 percent, Recode reports, citing “industry sources.” According to Recode, despite the peaked interest of outside investors, the company remains private and does not allow the stock to be traded on secondary markets.

The platform was swamped by an influx of new users looking to set up trading accounts as Bitcoin entered a massive bull run in November, 2017. Following the announcement of Bitcoin futures launch early that month on CME, Coinbase saw 100,000 new users sign up in just 24 hours.

Although Bitcoin’s long bull run ended in the week leading up to Christmas, its rise to an all-time high of $20,000 in mid-December saw Coinbase make massive revenues through trades on its platform.

The cryptocurrency exchange makes revenue by charging fees for fiat to crypto conversions via its Buy/Sell feature and for trades on its GDAX exchange.


Investors clawing for stake in Coinbase

The success of Coinbase has not gone unnoticed by investors and venture capitalists. According to Recode’s report, shares in the company are being sought out on a number of fronts.

However, Coinbase shareholders have been told not to sell their shares to outside parties. Doing so would constitute a breach of policy, Coinbase told Recode in a statement:

    "As a private company, Coinbase does not allow trading of stock on secondary markets for a variety of reasons, including the fact that there is not full and equal information available to the market. We will take appropriate action if we find people have sold Coinbase shares in violation of our agreements not to do so."

In August 2017, Coinbase raised $100 mln in a series D funding run aimed at increasing its engineering and customer service teams as well as opening a new GDAX office in New York. Investors that missed out on the latest fundraising series are trying their best to entice current shareholders to part ways with lucrative shares, Recode reported.

By December, Coinbase had over 13 million users -- more than mainstream brokerage firm Charles Schwab.


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinbase-overshoots-2017-revenue-goal-by-66-making-1-bln-rejects-further-vc-funding

Firms Continue To ‘Capitalize’ On Blockchain Name Hype, SEC Promises Increased Scrutiny



US companies who change their name to include the word ‘Blockchain’ could soon face increased scrutiny from regulators, new comments released Monday, Jan. 22. from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suggest.

Speaking at the Securities Regulation Institute Monday, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton devoted a small but pointed portion of his remarks to Blockchain technology. Specifically, Clayton addressed the growing phenomenon of companies adding the word ‘Blockchain’ to their names to “capitalize on the perceive promise” of doing so.

Cointelegraph previously reported on several businesses in the US and elsewhere changing their names so that the word ‘Blockchain’ featured in their official titles. The effect of this has been to dramatically increase the value of those businesses’ stock, allowing short-term profiteering and increased publicity.

In one case, involving a drinks company previously known as Long Island Iced Tea Corp., a name swap to ‘Long Island Blockchain Corp.’ raised the company’s stock prices enough to prevent it from being dropped from Nasdaq.

For the most part, however, it remains dubious how companies incorporating ‘Blockchain’ into their names actually interact with the technology, and to what extent they abide by best practices in doing so. Clayton described the situation, saying:

    “I doubt anyone in this audience thinks it would be acceptable for a public company with no meaningful track record in pursuing the commercialization of distributed ledger or blockchain technology to (1) start to dabble in blockchain activities, (2) change its name to something like "Blockchain-R-Us," and (3) immediately offer securities, without providing adequate disclosure to Main Street investors about those changes and the risks involved.”

This week saw UK-based telecoms acquisitions outfit Stapleton Capital jump on the bandwagon to become ‘Blockchain Worldwide,’ benefitting from a short-lived 130% stock increase which smoothed out to 45% the same day, Jan. 22.

For copycats, it appears, the SEC will soon weigh in to ensure such moves are above board. Clayton closed his Monday remarks on Blockchain saying:

    “The SEC is looking closely at the disclosures of public companies that shift their business models to capitalize on the perceived promise of distributed ledger technology and whether the disclosures comply with the securities laws, particularly in the case of an offering,”


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/firms-continue-to-capitalize-on-blockchain-name-hype-sec-promises-increased-scrutiny

Yeah, I rather get ban than "Red Trust"
Red Trust is for the Criminals, SCAMMERS, and so on!

Are DT members some kind of GANG or what?
I read some comments from different people regarding their work is awful, man!
All I see here, is we are friends in this forum, so why use your DT powers to destroy other people reputation?

What is wrong with deleting the so-called off-topic posts?
Come on, negative trust is for the SCAMMERS, not the regular members.
STOP MAKING PEOPLE LOOK CRIMINALS IN THE EYES OF THE WORLD.

"actmyname" gave me "red trust"
His profile: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=465017
His reference: https://archive.is/yJ4P8

I thought "Red Trust" is for SCAMMERS!!!
Well, I never involved myself in any scam because I'm too good to scam anyone.
It's unfair for "actmyname" to discredits my account here and the "red marking" my account is very unfair too.

Maybe, actmyname wants me out of this great community and perhaps that is what I should do.
It's pretty funny that I got a "red mark" for posting my opinion. I thought the forums are for people to talk about their opinion.
Instead, some people are using this community to blackmail others. I'm not like that, and I'll never blackmail anyone.  

When you see, someone is doing something wrong or you don't like why not talk to him, instead of blackmailing him, huh?
actmyname - you've disappointed me! A single message would have solved this and we'll understand each other.
I have no interest in doing anything wrong to this community or anyone here.


Thanks

"actmyname" gave me "red trust"
His profile: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=465017
His reference: https://archive.is/yJ4P8 (Shitposting spammer)

I thought "Red Trust" is for SCAMMERS!!!
Well, I never involved myself in any scam because I'm too good to scam anyone.
It's unfair for "actmyname" to discredits my account here and the "red marking" my account is very unfair too.

Maybe, actmyname wants me out of this great community and perhaps that is what I should do.
It's pretty funny that I got a "red mark" for posting my opinion. I thought the forums are for people to talk about their opinion.
Instead, some people are using this community to blackmail others. I'm not like that, and I'll never blackmail anyone.  

When you see, someone is doing something wrong or you don't like why not talk to him, instead of blackmailing him, huh?
actmyname - you've disappointed me! A single message would have solved this and we'll understand each other.
I have no interest in doing anything wrong to this community or anyone here.


Thanks



 

Something is clearly wrong with this guy.
I got red mark without cheating or scamming anyone here ever.
is that the meaning of the Legendary member is or what - actmyname? or it is just a set-up?

Indian Banks Suspending Bitcoin Exchange Accounts



Bitcoin exchanges are under fire in India, as many of the nation’s top banks have suspended or greatly curtailed functionality on exchange accounts. State Bank of India (SBI), Axis Bank, HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and Yes Bank have all taken strong action toward crypto exchanges, either closing accounts or severely limiting functionality. The banks cite the risk of dubious transactions, according to local reports.

The news follows the request of advocate Bivas Chatterjee who recently filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in Calcutta to impose immediate regulations on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Additionally, the Ministry of Finance referred to Bitcoin as a ponzi scheme before the end of last year.

Increasing scrutiny for cryptocurrencies from governments has led to private banks and institutions beginning to remove support for exchanges around the world. Most recently, Metropolitan Bank put an immediate halt on all wire transfers for cryptocurrency exchanges, leaving many transactions stranded in cyberspace.

The international mood toward Bitcoin has continued to tighten, particularly with US Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin stating that the G20 nations will begin working together to make sure that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are properly regulated.


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/indian-banks-suspending-bitcoin-exchange-accounts

Bitcoin exchanges are under fire in India, as many of the nation’s top banks have suspended or greatly curtailed functionality on exchange accounts. State Bank of India (SBI), Axis Bank, HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and Yes Bank have all taken strong action toward crypto exchanges, either closing accounts or severely limiting functionality. The banks cite the risk of dubious transactions, according to local reports.

The news follows the request of advocate Bivas Chatterjee who recently filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in Calcutta to impose immediate regulations on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Additionally, the Ministry of Finance referred to Bitcoin as a ponzi scheme before the end of last year.

Increasing scrutiny for cryptocurrencies from governments has led to private banks and institutions beginning to remove support for exchanges around the world. Most recently, Metropolitan Bank put an immediate halt on all wire transfers for cryptocurrency exchanges, leaving many transactions stranded in cyberspace.

CoinTelegraph: https://cointelegraph.com/news/indian-banks-suspending-bitcoin-exchange-accounts

Keep Calm And Hodl? CNBC Guest Tells Bitcoin Critic to ‘Piss Off’



The mainstream media debate over Bitcoin as a success or failure approached live comedy this week after a “brawl” broke out between guests on a CNBC panel.

In an exchange which ended an edition of the network’s increasingly notorious Fast Money segment, regular contributor and RiskReversal.com editor Dan Nathan told Evercore ISI technician Rich Ross to “go piss off” after he criticized Bitcoin’s performance.

Ross had previously maintained that Bitcoin was a poor investment choice in the past few months due to its near-50% fall this week. Traditional stock investments, on the other hand, had allegedly fared better, with Ross giving the example of Boeing’s 200% gains since 2016.

As Zerohedge notes, reproducing the unedited version of the exchange, Ross had failed to note Bitcoin’s annual gains of over 1000% in 2017 alone. Nathan labeled him “glib” to deride it.

“You’ve been wrong, so don’t say that I’m glib,” Ross retorted before Nathan weighed in with the fateful remark:

“You don't know what I've done, you don't know what my call is, so go piss off, seriously.”

The episode continues Fast Money’s somewhat bizarre approach to Bitcoin reporting. In December, the segment made headlines for suddenly switching allegiances to become extremely bullish on altcoin Bitcoin Cash.

At the time, its dedicated Twitter account began publishing material which strongly criticized Bitcoin, telling respondents to “deal with” the rise of Bitcoin Cash instead.

That style of content has since not made a return.


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/keep-calm-and-hodl-cnbc-guest-tells-bitcoin-critic-to-piss-off

This may sound funny but that is the reality. why?
Though the title says it all, you know China was the once the safe haven for bitcoin and bitcoiners.
Then, China started doing something to hurt the bitcoin and cryptocurrency in-general from banning ICOs to cryptocurrency exchanges and now they are after bitcoin miners, again... What is your thought on this matter? Share with us. thanks

Bitcoin Under Increasing Scrutiny on Island of Bali



Bitcoin is under heavy surveillance on Bali, an island in the Indonesian archipelago, according to local reports. Central Bank officials are seeking to crack down on the use of the cryptocurrency anywhere in the nation. Causa Iman Karana, head of Bank Indonesia's representative office in Bali said:

    "We found out from some postings on social media that Bali appeared to have become a haven for Bitcoin transactions. The next step is we will ban them as mandated by the law. We ask them not to use it anymore. Along with the Directorate of Special Crime Investigation unit, we will enforce the rule that all transactions in Indonesia must use rupiah.”

The country had previously been reported as having significant local adoption of Bitcoin usage, but recent reports indicate that the government is trying to curtail the use of digital currencies. The risk of money laundering and criminal activity has led to the increased scrutiny.

The harsh rhetoric against Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies falls more in line with the Chinese and potential South Korean bans than the more lenient Australian position.


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-under-increasing-scrutiny-on-island-of-bali

Well, I started storing my bitcoin and altcoins using online wallets which are Xapo, Blockchain.info, and MyEtherWallet.

Xapo - is an online bitcoin wallet that is very easy to use, user-friendly and very secure.
Blockchain.info - is an online bitcoin and Ethereum wallet where people can now buy and sell bitcoin.
MyEtherWallet (MEW) - This is ERC-20 Standard wallet where people can store ethereum based tokens.

Ledger Wallet - This is offline wallet where I store my bitcoin and altcoin for long-term. Ledger is fully off-the-grid which makes it very, very secure.
Luno Wallet - This is one of my favorites. In fact, it is my personal Coinbase of today, it has low fees, it is very user-friendly, and also very secure too.  

Well, here is the reliable news from CoinDesk so far.

Report: India's Government Sends Tax Notices to Cryptocurrency Traders

India's government has reportedly sent tax notices to cryptocurrency traders and investors following a nationwide survey.
According to Reuters, a survey found that Indian citizens conducted more than $3.5 billion worth of trades and other transactions across a 17-month period. The government also collected data from nine exchanges within the country, and per the report, notices have been issued to "tens of thousands of people."
As a result, India is now looking to tax capital gains, as well as receive information about how much people own in cryptocurrencies and where their funds are located.

https://www.coindesk.com/report-indias-government-sends-tax-notices-to-cryptocurrency-traders/

Because of this news, I don't think the Indian government is banning bitcoin trading rather impose new tax laws for bitcoin traders.

It is funny how many people try to come up with bitcoin origin and the team behind it.
How can they say the bitcoin was created by this guy today and say another guy the next day? That's dramatic!
I don't believe AIA created the bitcoin because the bitcoin is fully open-source and many developers around the world contributed to it.
Did anyone here ever see the government project "An Intelligence Project" came out to be open-source? I don't think so. That's why I'm not buying this