|
@target. My theory is yes, he might be manipulating the the people running FTX and Alameda Research, however, I speculate that he might also be the first whistleblower who went to tell the government about FTX, Sam the vegetarian and sweet Caroline hehehe.
Sam Tabasco might have also known already where FTX and Alameda was about to go and he might have thought that he should get out first bringing money for retirement and a yacht to travel.
|
|
|
|
@yudi09. Also, if we think on the reality of the cryptospace, what would be good if everyone panicked because Binance really had a wallet maintenance? I shake my head and I reckon there are certain people in the the cryptospace who want to cause this fear and panic. We had different types of fud on CZ and Binance reported by cryptonews and mainstream news media, however, where is this? 4.  |
|
|
|
~snip~
In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.
Isn't the financing of terrorism through Bitcoin a story that has been going on for years, mostly from the US media? It's nothing new, it's just taking advantage of the moment when such stories become relevant again, because it should be noted that the most powerful intelligence organizations in the world failed to prevent terrorists from carrying out such a massive attack, for which they had obviously been preparing for years. I wonder how terrorists were financed before there was Bitcoin? SAN FRANCISCO — Hamas, the militant Palestinian group, has been designated a terrorist organization by Western governments and some others and has been locked out of the traditional financial system. But this year its military wing has developed an increasingly sophisticated campaign to raise money using Bitcoin. https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/cryptocurrencies-and-terrorist-financing-risk-hold-panichttps://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1096851.pdfAgreed, it is nothing new and all these allegations of terrorist funding are only allegations without attempting to back them with proof. Also, Chainalysis has already declared that terrorist funding through the use of bitcoin has been overstated. However, my argument is this will not stop the government and the mainstream media from using terrorist funding as their next big storyline to make everyone fearful. Fud has always been something the government uses to trick ignorant people into supporting their oppressive campaigns very much similar to the war on drugs scam. Reports of tens of millions of dollars in crypto going to fund Palestinian operations in Israel are likely “overstated,” Chainalysis said. The forensics outfit published a blog post arguing that flows of crypto financing to Hamas and affiliated groups have become inflated far beyond reality. While acknowledging that it was crucial to stop any financing of terror through crypto, Chainalysis said it was also important to understand how such funding actually works, lest it lead to misconceptions.Source https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/10/19/hamas-crypto-funding-likely-overstated-chainalysis/ |
|
|
|
|
@bisdak, @Boafeng. On Shakur being the WBC lightweight champion, would the fans have a unification vs. Devin Haney or will we witness Shakur and Haney avoid each other? There is also Tank hehehe. They might also avoid him very much similar to how the kings of welterweight were avoiding Boots Ennis.
|
|
|
|
|
@Rikafip. Poor Things is removed from the list hehe. I only assumed it was released already because it is in the sportsbooks' list for best picture already. I watched the trailer and this gave me a feeling that is something similar to Everything Everywhere All At Once. It might be the best picture winner if the voters vote like they have done last year, I reckon.
Also on Rottentomatoes, the early reviews are very good and they declare that Emma Stone might win for best actress. She is also the favorite in the sportsbooks this early, very much similar to Michelle Yeoh for her performance on Everything Everywhere hehehehe.
|
|
|
|
@Rikafip. You are lucky you only watched it in your home with subtitles. I watched it in the cinema and I was scratching my head and telling myself that this movie is not for the big screen.
What was the issue? You couldn't understand the conversations without subtitles or something? While I love going to cinema, the main reason I didn't watch Oppenheimer that way is because its simply too long for me to watch it that way. I just can't force myself to sit in cinema chair for 3 hours straight and for the same reason I didn't watch Killers of The Flower Moon which is even longer (almost 3 and a half hours). No, I might have a hearing problem hehehe. Also or movies that have much dialogue, I like to have the subtitles on for me to be more absorbed by the movie very much like reading a book. In any case, my list to watch for Saturday and Sunday will be Killers of the Flowermoon, Poor Things and the Holdovers. There is also a movie by Bradley Cooper with the title Maestro. He starred, directed and produced this movie. |
|
|
|
|
@Yaunfitda, @btc_angela. This is a head scratching move by the IBF to give their approval for a unification and when it was unified the IBF removes the championship from the boxer who had won the IBF title.
Also, Bud Crawford might have expressed that he will not fight Boots Ennis, however, does Bud have an opponent for his next fight already? The IBF should have waited, I reckon.
|
|
|
|
Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins? I mean, I don't think I need to imply this - it's already happening. They quite clearly want bitcoin to only be used via fully KYCed exchanges. Just read the proposals. They have even deliberately chosen the words they use to make anything else sound negative. It's no longer "self custody", but rather "non-hosted wallets". In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.
Terrorists, foreign governments, criminals, un-patriotic, what are you trying to hide, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN, and a whole variety of other pearl clutching nonsense. Then I guess people should stop supporting state terrorists (politicians). Vote for politicians who have expressed and declared their support for bitcoin and the cryptospace. This forum has the right to speculate and make fun of Robert Kennedy Jr, however, he is certainly the only presidential candidate who might make the executive order to stop cracking down on the cryptospace and create a more reasonable policies. |
|
|
|
What is Blackrock trying to imply or what might they have on their bitcoin investment roadmap? The skeptical me thinks that they want more control over the cryptospace if they are to invest billions of dollars on this.
For a potential market like cryptocurrency and scarce assets like bitcoin, there is no one who would not want more control. Even legislative agencies such as the SEC or CFTC are competing for the right to manage and control this potential industry. Therefore, you do not need to doubt or be too surprised when large investment funds are ambitious to gain more control of this market. Therefore, while ETFs are welcomed by many people, there are also many people who are not satisfied. Because once ETFs are approved and large investment funds enter the market, we will gradually lose our freedom and be more controlled. I very much disagree and it appears that you are not trying to think more deeply into what type of a company this Blackrock is. This is not only about the ETF, it is also about the control stablecoin inflows and outflows. If only one firm controls much of these inflows and outflows, this firm will be something similar to Immortan Joe of the movie Mad Max: Fury Road, where he controls the water supply hehehehehee. |
|
|
|
Karma is a bitch.  SEC is the reason for many FUD on crypto which every crypto holders is affected. I doubt that someone in crypto industry will help this department that main goal is to suppress anonymity of crypto. They should just invest on training someone to become crypto expert rather than hire from crypto community that despise them badly. This is not karma. There is a requirement that before they can be hired, they should dump all of their cryptocoins and tokens. Why would anyone who has invested in the cryptospace do this? It would be something similar as becoming a traitor to the community hehehe. Also, it might be earning lesser than holding the right coins. LOL, but yeah, it has nothing to do with Karma, but maybe @Eternad is just sarcastic when he says that SEC is getting what they deserved for now. I mean they have been the bane of crypto enthusiast and most of the time, we think that they are really anti-crypto or having a hard stance. Nevertheless, it seems that this just just a hurdle, who knows, maybe the pay rate is really that good that someone will take a bite on this job. We all know that in the US there is also a problem with people not having a job and obviously, it's hard for them. But if they see fit in this role then why not? The pay rate might be good, however, what type of crypto experts would be attracted to work for the government? We have witnessed much of the experts in the cryptospace are scammers, some of the founders of many projects are not really experts and the investors who do their research invest in them only for their future potential not for what they presently are. That will be the biggest question on how they will define what "crypto experts" means, maybe here in our community or any other crypto community, they might have a different meaning for them. And even up to this day, we could have been debating the meaning of that and because it encompass a broader subject. Could be in terms of laws, or they could be looking as somewhat we can see a possible crypto scams and others. So it's a very broad subject and maybe that's why they have a hard time finding the right now and there is actually no real experts in this field as it is generally fairly young. So they will have to set everything by precedent and it could be some mistakes by this so called experts as far as decision making is. Also, the real experts in the cryptospace are very idealistic and they would never change their ideals to work for the politicians who want to take freedom away from the people. Was it not disruption of traditional finance was what inspired everyone to join the community and adopt the cryptospace? What would you reckon if Dan Larimer applied and took this job? I would reckon the enemies of his projects will be cracked down hehehehe. |
|
|
|
This is indeed one mega fight it is star-studded and headed by two former heavyweight champions, both Wilder and Joshua are expected to be the favorite here but both their challengers are expected to give them a hard fight I hope both former champions will hurdle their respective opponents so they can finally face each, its really long time coming I'm sure like many fans will watch this fight to see how former champions perform against their respective opponents.
Honestly, I am more worried about Joshua than Wilder not because Wallin is a dangerous fighter but because he is prone to upsets and has a weak character than Wilder.
Yeah, both Wilder and Joshua are heavy favorites in these matches with odds 1.17 and 1.26, respectively. But I'm more excited about Wilder vs. Parker here. Both are heavy punchers with the ability to end the fight right in the opening round. I bet the fight won't go the distance. Despite the lop-sided odds, I still think Parker can upset Wilder. As to Joshua vs. Wallin, I'm not expecting much. It will probably be not as explosive as the other bout. And there is Dmitry Bivol. I would just bet 3 fights for this event. Despite being still young AJ is not as good as before after his first loss or there are just fighters that he couldn't really beat because of the Southpaw stance. Saudi is ramping up because people there are hungry for entertainment and they are very rich to hold events like this. Ngannou could have been in this card if he just agreed to fight Wilder. The man fumbles the bag again, he is stubborn. However, how much would Francis Ngannou's purse be if his team agreed to fight the Bronze Bomber instead of Tyson Fury? Correct me if I am wrong but I reckon it would not be a bigger purse than fighting Fury. Also, Tyson Fury is a champion. It was not a championship fight, however, it was better to fight Fury than someone who is not champion and who also lost to Tyson Fury hehe. |
|
|
|
At least Arthur finally gave him a sizable workload, I think he had like 22 carries. Of course that has to do with the fact that they were up or close to being up the whole game. People will do everything but admit it was a mistake to waste an early round pick on a rookie RB that went to a team that uses a committee. I thought this was hilarious! Seriously doing deep dives on peoples family because your guy didn't get enough carries is completely over the top! I don't think there's anything wrong with drafting rookie RBS. Often times high draft pick rookie backs perform pretty well. Not to mention the average running back lifespan is like 3.5 years, so getting use out of them when they have fresh legs tends to make sense. Bijan wasn't a bad pick either, he's around 10th most points scored for RBs, which could be a whole lot worse. I agree though, it's insane the level of hatred people can grow to just off of ones fantasy play lol Heck of a game tomorrow ladies and gents. Cincy versus Baltimore..bit of a nice change from last weeks Bears/Panthers game lol Looks like Ravens are favored by -3.5 Cant wait to see how it turns out. Why is this -3.5 only? Is this because the Bengals won against the Bills on week 9? But the Bills are not a very good team for 2023. They also lost vs. Russell Wilson and the Broncos on week 10 hehehehe. Also, it might be because the Ravens lost to the Brown? In any case, I reckon good bets on week 11 might be New York Giants +9 and also the Cowboys -11. The Commanders will not win -9. Also on the Cowboys, if they can win against the spread with -16 against the Giants they can also do this against the Panthers. |
|
|
|
|
Why is it that if Binance announces maintenance checks and withdrawals will not be allowed for only 30 minutes the fud from social media begins and much of this fud is also being shared in this forum. 30 minutes is clearly not enough to stop a bankrun hehehehe. If this 30 minutes becomes 24 hours then everyone should begin the fud. This is becoming very boring, I reckon. Also, if Binance wanted to stop a bankrun it will freeze all withdrawals in all types of cryptocoins.
|
|
|
|
If congress agrees then there might have more laws against self custody, there will be stricter KYC and there will certainly be a certain classification of people who will be banned from using the cryptospace. As I've said before, this is the clear direction the US government is heading in. They want the only bitcoin to be bitcoin which is bought on fully KYCed exchanges, stored on fully KYCed exchanges, and not sent anywhere except to other fully KYCed exchanges. They want complete control over everything that you "own", and they want complete surveillance of everything that you do. As with this piece of legislation, using any non-KYCed service will be illegal. Hell, even holding your own coins will be illegal. I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins? This is headshaking, however, I also cannot disagree if we consider reailty. I reckon Monero does not solve this also because the American government can ban it within their jurisdiction and order a crackdown on any exchange that accepts it. In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace. |
|
|
|
Karma is a bitch. SEC is the reason for many FUD on crypto which every crypto holders is affected. I doubt that someone in crypto industry will help this department that main goal is to suppress anonymity of crypto. They should just invest on training someone to become crypto expert rather than hire from crypto community that despise them badly. This is not karma. There is a requirement that before they can be hired, they should dump all of their cryptocoins and tokens. Why would anyone who has invested in the cryptospace do this? It would be something similar as becoming a traitor to the community hehehe. Also, it might be earning lesser than holding the right coins. LOL, but yeah, it has nothing to do with Karma, but maybe @Eternad is just sarcastic when he says that SEC is getting what they deserved for now. I mean they have been the bane of crypto enthusiast and most of the time, we think that they are really anti-crypto or having a hard stance. Nevertheless, it seems that this just just a hurdle, who knows, maybe the pay rate is really that good that someone will take a bite on this job. We all know that in the US there is also a problem with people not having a job and obviously, it's hard for them. But if they see fit in this role then why not? The pay rate might be good, however, what type of crypto experts would be attracted to work for the government? We have witnessed much of the experts in the cryptospace are scammers, some of the founders of many projects are not really experts and the investors who do their research invest in them only for their future potential not for what they presently are. I am afraid the experts that the SEC will be hiring might not be real experts because real experts are very difficult to find. |
|
|
|
The results of the games you mentioned are headshaking except for San Francisco vs. the Jaguars hehehehe. Also, the Bills which lost vs. the Broncos in their home stadium was not very shocking for me. I mentioned this last week and asked if there were injuries on the Bronco's secondary. This Josh Allen appears to have a minor injury, I reckon. This season he does not scramble very much like the seasons when he was speculated to be the next regular season MVP. I speculate that it might be his knee or his ankle.
Josh Allen is dealing with a right shoulder injury, which is his throwing arm, and it seems way more serious than previously reported as he is missing practices, if to this you add he is showing regression, his cap hit is increasing, there seems to be turmoil on the locker room and even the Madden curse could be involved, this help us understand what it may be going on, I also think Allen may have gotten too used to get the big play and move the ball too fast instead of methodically beating his opponents, and recently even Tom Brady made the observation that he is taking too many risks and said Allen should tone it down a little bit. On Discord, it mentioned by someone that Stefon Diggs was being very self important and demanded that he have more balls thrown at him which might have been giving much pressure on Josh Allen and how he wants to play. Josh Allen might always say that Stefon Diggs is my brother, however, there are some articles that would make you skeptical of this. In any case, for the next game in fantasy I am against Burrowhead. The projection is telling me that I will win similar to what it has told me last week hehehee. |
|
|
|
What is Blackrock trying to imply or what might they have on their bitcoin investment roadmap? The skeptical me thinks that they want more control over the cryptospace if they are to invest billions of dollars on this. It also appears that this article is mistaken. Blackrock has an investment on USDC through being an investor on USDC's issuer Circle. To control the stablecoin market is to control much the inflows and outflows of the cryptospace. In a recent move by BlackRock Inc., a leading asset manager, the firm has highlighted the potential risks stablecoins pose to the Bitcoin market in its filing for a US spot Bitcoin ETF. This disclosure, part of a public document submitted to regulators, brings forth the complexities and challenges in the evolving cryptocurrency landscape.
BlackRock’s document underscores the indirect exposure to stablecoins, specifically mentioning Tether USD (USDT) and Circle USD (USDC). Despite not investing in these digital assets, the firm acknowledges their significant impact on Bitcoin and other digital asset markets. Interestingly, the document details the nature of stablecoins, emphasizing their intention to maintain a stable market value, a goal that has recently seen challenges.Source https://coingape.com/blackrock-inc-spotlights-stablecoin-risks-in-us-bitcoin-etf-filing/ |
|
|
|
It appears this rumor is becoming true hehehe, this only occurs in the cryptospace. An exchange created to scam from the beginning, restored and restructured to accept new customers but with a bad reputation. If this becomes a success, there might be something wrong with us.
No, this cannot be allowed to happen. How can people ever possibly trust a crypto exchange again after it went bankrupt and went to hell? Also, how will the investors and celebrity advertisers ever trust FTX after the reputation damaged it caused all of them? The only people who will use FTX after this, are fools waiting to be parted with their money again. Also, as a reminder, Sam Tabasco is somewhere on his yacht, sailing around the world and enjoying his luxurious life using your money.
Sam Trabucco you mean? Bankruptcy is okay. However, if an exchange was already a scam from the beginning that hurt many small investors, it should not be allowed to continue. Also yes, Sam Tabasco.  |
|
|
|
There are many spot etfs in many countries already this is nothing new. I think somewhere in Europe there was a bitcoin etf from maybe 5 years back.
USA and the sec is the only country pretty much that refuses to launch one and we don’t know why. Look at how many stocks go bankrupt like Bed bath and beyond and they head to $0 while they think that bitcoin network might stall and the etf will go to $0, highly unlikely.
In many countries? How many and what are these countries? I am quite certain that there are not many countries offering spot ETFs for bitcoin or other cryptocoins. Also, if it is a spot ETF in a developing country with a small market, we can also be quite certain that it will not have effect on the whole market. On Bed Bath and Beyond, you cannot compare hehehe. I do not know the story but the stock goes to 0 because the company behind the stock went bankrupt and if a company goes bankrupt, they are ordered to delist their stock from the stock market. In an case, back on topic, can the data on the take up on futures ETF be used as precedent for how much the take might be for the spot ETF? More than 1 is many. And I think Bitcoin spot ETFs are already offered in certain countries like USA's neighbor Canada, and in Switzerland and Germany in Europe, in Brazil in South America, and in Australia as well, and other countries in the whole world. And these are developed countries as well. Futures ETF cannot be used as a precedent because it doesn't offer 100% exposure to Bitcoin. Spot ETFs are backed by Bitcoin itself. That's the kind of exposure offered by a Bitcoin spot ETF. And also futures are expensive to maintain compared to spot ETF. The numbers in countries where both Bitcoin futures and spot ETFs are available are proof that spot ETF is much more in demand than futures. I very much disagree, I am sorry. More than 1 and less than 7 is a few, 7 or 8 is several, more than 10 is what I would consider many. However, I was only asking. If there are really more than 10 countries that have issued an ETF then there many and it might make for the argument that the take up might be low. In any case, @Lucius made a good argument that the take up was low because none of those that issued the ETF were from Blackrock hehehehe. |
|
|
|
Keep in mind, these awards were consistently losing relevance and public until something as unhinged as that happened and became viral.
Incident from last year won't make it any more popular or relevant. On the other hand, what will make it more relevant is when they finally stop to push their agenda but I don't see that happening anytime soon. Politics aside. Don't you remember the reaction people had once Will Smith slapped Chirs in the face? It completely give a lot of attention to the Oscars, even people who did not follow the awards was aware of what happened and commented about it and also, it is not a lie or an exaggeration those awards were going through a period of decadence since some years ago, whether because the agenda you talk about or because people were simply not as interested as before. I would even dare to say more people are keeping an eye on this year's edition because of the scandal of Will Smith, staged or not. It would not stop the organizers to try to pull off something to keep people hooked on their event. The slapping of Chris Rock occurred during 2022 Oscar ceremomies. The Academy of motion pictures arts and science asked Chris Rock to be the host again for the 2023 ceremonies which I speculate that the slapping could be used for marketing hehe. However, Chris Rock did not accept. He said it would be something similar to returning to a crime scene hehehehe. @Rikafip. You are lucky you only watched it in your home with subtitles. I watched it in the cinema and I was scratching my head and telling myself that this movie is not for the big screen. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
