Да, и при этом цена биткоина и цена эфириума не растёт. Наоборот, цены этих двух ведущих криптовалют падают. Отсюда можно сделать вывод, что средство выводятся из этих трёх бирж в fiat.

Вероятно инвесторы переходят на другие рынки, в частности на фондовые рынки, а также осуществляют покупку государственных облигаций США.

Всё это может быть началом разгрома двух ведущих систем на криптовалютном рынке - Coinbase и Binance.

При этом binance всегда была мутной конторой, а вот Coinbase - это вполне официальная респектабельная криптовалютная биржа. Атака на неё может означать, что у регуляторов принципиальные идеологические претензии к криптовалютным биржам.

И что очень странно, никто не пытается атаковать Tether. Интересно почему?

Сбербанк это реальная бизнес-структура, о которой мало упоминаний в прессе, но это не значит, что у ее руководителей и акционеров не хватает ресурса и влияния. Ресурса у них очень даже немало. И сфера бизнес - интересов у них более - чем обширная.

Сейчас они правда ушли из публичного пространства - ранее о них много писали.

Но это не значит, что они не проявляют активность, просто она не очень заметна стороннему наблюдателю.

Что касается криптовалют, то если криптовалюты используются для обхода санкций, то логично, что нужна структура для торговли криптой и для осуществления задач по обмену крипта - Фиат.

И Сбербанку интересно занять этот рынок.

Мне стало интересно, вы все такие интересные кошельки мониторите или случайно попалось на глаза?

Вроде как лежат на месте до сих пор:
https://beaconcha.in/address/4de23f3f0fb3318287378adbde030cf61714b2f3

Because it's all about the power, not about protecting investors. By doing that, SEC would be reducing their power. Without clear rules, they have a power to strike at any time at any crypto, or the entire industry if they wish to.


Sadly, the crypto industry has no strong lobby and is politically irrelevant. But even if they were, as SEC is deemed an independent body, Gensler's position is pretty safe, as long as he doesn't go against the SEC's Commissioners (who appointed him).

Moreover, SEC's actions are in line with the current administration's crackdown on crypto, known as "Operation Choke Point 2.0".

I expect that, POS currencies are centralized and removing them from the centralized exchanges means their end/

This depends on how Binance clean. I believe that they do some illegal behavior, such as manipulating the prices of altcoins through listing and delisting, some manipulation in the futures market, using customer deposits through that I do not expect that Binance will go far in judicial investigations because this means that more eyes will monitor its activity. They will abandon the US market, but they will try to make as much money as possible, and they may prefer to pay a settlement rather than go to court or try to give SEC what they want by sharing more data with them.

Hello folks,

Which of these two is safer in the face of what we are going through now? WBTC or BBTC? Is BBTC mandatory linked to Binance? That is, if there is a blockade of assets or non-parity between what it claims to have and what it actually has, can the BBTC lose the 1:1 parity?

Yes, of course, each of us needs to attempt to tailor our investment into bitcoin (if any) to our own situation - and we are both the best person to decide regarding what our allocation is going to be (if any) and how to go about getting to our desired allocation level, if we might not happen to be there yet.

Frequently, I have stated that it could take a person 10 years or so to merely get to something like 1 years worth of income saved up and hopefully allocated to some kind of an investment portfolio, and that would presume if someone were to be able to set aside 10% of their income per year and various factors associated with that - including choosing ways to invest and staying somewhat persistent and not fucking up too much - even though many times a lot of us know that a lot of mistakes can be made along the way in terms of building our investment portfolios - and even many times questioning if we are making progress or if our approach to how we are doing it is a good (and solid one).

There can be ways in which any of us might have some luck in our ability to build our investment portfolio faster than expectations, but sometimes if someone is younger in life they might not even be able to earn very much cash and may also be spending money on self-improvement such as college or vocational training.. and there can be a variety of ways that they might not be able to create a lot of discretionary income that would allow them to invest - but then there might be other circumstances in which some younger person might come into opportunities in which they are able to earn way more than they need to live and to thereby end up being able to save/invest large amounts of their income (such as 30% to 50%) which may also then accelerate their abilities to get to a decently sized investment portfolio and also have greater potential to reach fuck you status (if we might tentatively presume that entry fuck-you status might be getting to an investment portfolio size that might be somewhere in the ballpark of 20x to 30x of a person's expected annual cashflow needs).

Bitcoin does seem to provide for ways in which there are possibilities to accelerate the building of wealth - and of course, none of that wealth building is guaranteed.. and also there still can be quite a few ways to screw up, even if the intention might have had been not to screw up.

It is simple and depends on how much return you get from holding the cryptocurrency, is there a return or not? In Bitcoin, if you keep Bitcoin in your wallet for 10 years, your Bitcoin number will not increase because there is no staking.
According to what I read here if they hold an asset for 365 days you would receive about 5.67%, so Dash is listed https://www.coinbase.com/earn/staking/dash#:~:text=This%20means%20that%2C %20on%20average,being%20staked%2C%20is%2038.99%25.


I think that all that happens is that these systems do not conflict with the policies of the Federal Reserve, which gives a return of less than 5.67%, so all currencies that give a higher return will be included in that list.

Why can't he just make up his mind, considering that he has no problem listing a slew of other cryptos as securities.

Hell, why don't they make some framework on what makes a crypto a security in the United States (the Howey Test is not specific enough)?

This kind of waffling is really going to end badly for Gensler and the SEC since basically the entire crypto industry has turned on them.

Instead of fighting scams they are busy debating what is a security or not. Cybercriminals win.

DASH is not a security, it is basically ancient Bitcoin Core tech and bitcoin is not even considered a security

It's hard to feel sorry for the rest of these coins though, as most of them are being used for relentless profiteering from pump&dumps. For example, "Axie Infinity" LOL - is there anyone who is not using it purely as a money-making scheme? A token for bankrupt Voyager? And similar cases can be made against most of the other coins as well.