More Regulation Incoming!

[Blawpaw]

Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry. Unfortunately,  this sort of event is nothing new to the industry as every day we see crypto businesses going bankrupt and new scams coming in.
The recent FTX event motivated the US United States Financial Stability Oversight Council or FSOC is now recommending legislators study new regulations for cryptos.

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

[1714952183]

1714952183

[1714952183]

1714952183

[1714952183]

1714952183

[Ayers]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

[Gozie51]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

I don't know the kind of regulation that will be done on bitcoin itself because I don't see that coming. Countries can only try that people don't buy bitcoin but how will they know who is buying in decentralised exchange? They can only regulate centralised exchange and ask for KYC on customers and they monitor the exchange and the customer through that but I don't think total regulation like the forex is going to work.

[dansus021]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

Regulation will good if only hit the Centralized Exchange Market Only so other investor who scared about crypto like scam or fraud can at least breath because they know there is gov at least helping them.

we can take example of my country all legal cex should registered their company called Bappebti but the other negative side that we should talk with them incase want to Listing some coin/token

[avikz]

Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry. Unfortunately,  this sort of event is nothing new to the industry as every day we see crypto businesses going bankrupt and new scams coming in.
The recent FTX event motivated the US United States Financial Stability Oversight Council or FSOC is now recommending legislators study new regulations for cryptos.

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

Regulations are inevitable, regardless of whether you like it or not! Such incidents like FTX are only making the process faster. It is putting more pressure on regulatory bodies to bring in a framework so that any such future events can be avoided.

I understand a lot of people don't like regulations but if exchanges are centralized and established as a legal entity, they are expected to follow certain regulations. So a more structured regulation will make the centralized businesses more transparent for its users.

[BlackHatCoiner]

[...]

The bad thing with huge exchange bankruptcies (like FTX and MtGox) is that they create ambience for regulations, and usually regulations do more harm than good when it comes to the free market. 

I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy.

Indeed. And the winners are mostly large corporations. Now, I don't know about you, but I don't like volatility. However, I neither believe more regulation will calm things down with no tradeoffs, though.

[Plaguedeath]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

[maikrothaman]

Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry

I disagree. It alerts individuals to stay away from central enterprises when making investments. It demonstrates to the public that decentralized coins are robust, in contrast to centralized businesses that promoted ponzi schemes, which failed.

[MCVXYZ]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

I think that regulations can be either good or bad, depending on various factors. On one hand, they can help build trust and confidence in the community. On the other hand, those who have been involved in the cryptocurrency industry for a while may not feel the need for regulations, as they have gained experience and are aware of many scams. However, regulations can also help protect newcomers from fraud and financial losses due to scams.

[Poker Player]

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

I'm all for low taxes and minimal regulations but I'm going to play devil's advocate in this case. In general when a successful industry is born, as cryptocurrencies would be in this case, the absence of regulations helps the business flourish. Not paying taxes, either because it is not foreseen in the legislation or because it is easy to escape them and the industry players do not pay them, also help the initial growth, as much more can be reinvested in the business.

But as the industries mature, some regulations become necessary so that it doesn't look like the Wild West and fraudsters run wild.

I would like regulations in which people who play an important role within the bitcoin ecosystem would be involved, which is not going to happen, as they will be made by politicians seeking to preserve their status quo, even though they may seek industry input to save face.

[PrivacyG]

I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

Oh buddy would they love witnessing that.

-----

I think that regulations can be either good or bad, depending on various factors. On one hand, they can help build trust and confidence in the community. On the other hand, those who have been involved in the cryptocurrency industry for a while may not feel the need for regulations, as they have gained experience and are aware of many scams. However, regulations can also help protect newcomers from fraud and financial losses due to scams.

I am convinced they are not clustering up regulations to prevent you from becoming a victim.  Because then regulations would sound different.  They are afraid of things they can not control.  Such as Bitcoin and your actions if you have Privacy.

To me, only reason regulations are good is that businesses can get through the regulatory stuff easier and do not sit in a gray area of the market any more.  Other than that, to us as customers and regular citizens there is nothing to win.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[zasad@]

https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/sec-charges-thor-token-creators-for-26m-ico/
SEC Charges Thor Token Creators for $2.6m ICO
"Moravec has heard similar charges but has already decided to settle. Under the settlement, he cannot engage in cryptocurrency activities for three years, must pay a fine of $95,000 and disgorge $407,103 plus prejudgment interest of $72,209.45."

The SEC knows how to have fun, how many more projects will be punished?

[AbuBhakar]

Imho, Having more regulation is good rather than allowing big time scum bag freely steal people money using his shitcoin to rigged the DeFi scam scheme. People like Justin Sun will just keep stealing money if SEC didn't step in.

Justin Sun must have been a nice boy this year. 🎅 delivered some big presents

1: H.E Borrowed 200M USDT from JustLend which he later collateralized via TRX
2. Sent 200M USDT to Binance
3. Chain swapped to ETH and withdrew
4. Swapped to USDC on 1inch
5. Cashed out 100m USD

I believe there are lot of big people doing scam scheme like this freely since there is no regulators that protect consumers from this scheme. Poor TRX holders.

[yhiaali3]

The FTX incident will certainly bring more stringent regulations against Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, but there is also something positive in favor of protecting users from similar incidents.
For example, the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies agreed to pass a law to legalize cryptocurrency as a means of payment, and the FTX collapse incident was taken into account and a clause was made in the law requiring exchanges to clearly distinguish between company funds and users:

Apart from designating crypto as a payment method, the law enables the creation of licenses for crypto exchange platforms and for custody and management of crypto by third parties. In addition to this, the law will require exchanges to make a clear distinction between company and user funds, to avoid another incident like the FTX collapse.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/brazil-passes-law-to-legalize-crypto-as-a-payment-method

In my opinion, distinguishing between company assets and user assets is an important development in favor of protecting users from similar incidents in the future.

[Findingnemo]

Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry.

The actual damage is done by the media because they are the one who portrays in that way and its caused by ignorance of the individuals so how can be the cryptocurrency responsible for that. Stock market too have lot of restrictions but still many companies robbed their investors either directly or indirectly so regulations can't really stop the scam unless the investors get enough knowledge about what to do and not to do.

[virasog]

Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry. Unfortunately,  this sort of event is nothing new to the industry as every day we see crypto businesses going bankrupt and new scams coming in.
The recent FTX event motivated the US United States Financial Stability Oversight Council or FSOC is now recommending legislators study new regulations for cryptos.

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

Unfortunately, the collapse of FTX and other centralized platforms have given an excuse to the regulators to enforce strict regulations in crypto industry. Now the regulators have an example of FTX that people money is being stolen and they should implement strict laws against crypto currencies.
There are centralized platforms whom motive is to earn money and they never care the growth of the crypto market.

[sheenshane]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

Regulation has nothing to do with a decentralized platform, it could be applicable on the centralized platforms if this is your choice.
Might you forget the goal of the Bitcoin creator the reason why Bitcoin was created?  What we can do now is to avoid centralized platforms to avoid more regulations. 

[uneng]

After what we saw last year it was expected. I don't know if it will be bad like many think it's going to be, from the adoption point of view. I think it actually can have a very positive impact, because investors are looking for guarantees and safety when investing their money. If they see cases like FTX and Celsius without the industry addressing the issues and preventing it from happening again futurely, of course they will stay away from crypto market. But if they see regulations are coming to prevent new scams from happening, I believe it's very likely they will start investing again. Anyway, since regulations are a double edge sword, it's necessary to follow closely how they are being introduced, who is going to be benefited and what are their consequences for real.

[Gozie51]

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

I think what should be more important is the punishment for scammers and not just the legislation for what they should do but how it must be mandatorily retrieve the money of investors. The FTX exchange scam is one too many that investors lost huge money that is not traceable or gotten back. Regulation is good but it has to be strong enough to punish scammers.

[RahbabaKahn]

Cryptocurrency and the evolution of blockchain technology is a real visible revolution in trading and worldwide monetary exchange.  One key ruling by the SEC was that they decided that a Token represents a security by the company that issued that token. 
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC. 
Example:  Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them.  But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers.  If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls.  Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security.  It is more like a commodity.  Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply.  That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation.  The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc.  The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.

[stompix]

https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC. 
Example:  Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them.  But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers.  If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls.  Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security. 

Did Mattel make half a billion dollars for the company itself and used to play with them in exchange for services and used them to take loans and guarantee loans on other assets?  Did Mattel at any time claim that these dolls are going to use to "improve and power the Mattel ecosystem? Did Mattel offer you any kind of interest on the dolls you would purchase and then send them back to their depo for a period of time, in a signed contract? Did Mattel promise they will buy back a few of the dolls and throw them in a dump so that the price of the other dolls would increase over time?

It is more like a commodity.  Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply. 

Yeah lol, just because it doesn't happen that offer, can you please tell me who stops CZ from releasing more BNB? Oh, wait, nobody has stopped him! Or you tell me of a few top cryptocurrencies besides Bitcoin that are fully decentralized and there is no one governing and ruling on a whim, well, like ETH? Or BNB? Or XRP? Or Terra, lol!!!

[zasad@]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/nec/briefing-room/2023/01/27/the-administrations-roadmap-to-mitigate-cryptocurrencies-risks/
The Administration’s Roadmap to Mitigate Cryptocurrencies’ Risks
"The Administration wholeheartedly supports responsible technological innovations that make financial services cheaper, faster, safer, and more accessible. Yet to realize these benefits, new technologies need commensurate safeguards.. bla..bla.."
Request for Information; Digital Assets Research and Development
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/26/2023-01534/request-for-information-digital-assets-research-and-development

[RahbabaKahn]

While I agree that the SEC wants to enforce the Securities Act of 1933, they don't need to make a blanket statement that all cryptocurrencies should be treated as securities.  There are some tokens currently considered commodities, which places their regulation under a different regulatory agency.  Sure there will many con-men and scammers taking part in this blockchain alt-currency revolution, and the SEC and CFTC bureaucracies feel obligated to protect investors from such activity.  But rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, I would prefer to see them create some type of amendment to their existing regulations that would accommodate the uniqueness of blockchain tokens separately from stocks, bonds, and debt instruments sold by corporations.  In the mean time, I'll just wait and watch on the sidelines and hope that the highly paid legal authorities battle out some type of enforceable regulation without damaging the current successful blockchain technology.

[zasad@]

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/03/us-cftc-chief-promises-more-precedent-setting-crypto-enforcement-cases/
US CFTC Chief Promises More ‘Precedent-Setting’ Crypto Enforcement Cases
Commission Chairman Behnam says his agency is gearing up for another year of significant actions in the crypto industry as he tries to ramp up his enforcement staff.
One of the U.S. agencies trying to bolster oversight of cryptocurrency trading, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), is looking toward a big year of crypto enforcement actions, according to Chairman Rostin Behnam.

[bittraffic]

More regulatory bodies are trying to fight over which of them will supposedly regulate crypto. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) was once also in one article on a crypto site demanding regulation in which crypto could also be their domain.

SEC,  FSOC, and CFTC have to make it clearer which of them is really going to regulate crypto. I guess all of them have thier own grand plan to have a grip on this industry, they got to take taxes. The problem is that crypto is borderless and US doesn't own the biggest CEX.

[zasad@]

https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/article/kraken-faces-sec-probe-over-unregistered-securities-sales
The Kraken exchange may be next on the Securities and Exchange Commission's hit list.
Kraken is being probed by the agency for selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens, Bloomberg reported on Feb. 8. A settlement may be coming in days, it added.
The SEC has long held that nearly all cryptocurrencies except Bitcoin are securities that must be registered with the agency and sold by registered broker-dealers.

[sha420hashcollision]

Cryptocurrency and the evolution of blockchain technology is a real visible revolution in trading and worldwide monetary exchange.  One key ruling by the SEC was that they decided that a Token represents a security by the company that issued that token. 
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC. 
Example:  Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them.  But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers.  If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls.  Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security.  It is more like a commodity.  Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply.  That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation.  The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc.  The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.

This is delusional, Mattel dolls are not some speculative floating point number on an excell spreadsheet being scanned by some horribly written python code. Im not some Mattel fan but the business model of selling Toys or Dolls actually provides some value to children, selling some paper shitcoin that left a ton of people holding -100% in their portfolio is not a product. You should sit in the corner and really think about what delusional bullshit you just typed out.

[zasad@]

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/09/stablecoin-issuer-paxos-is-being-investigated-by-new-york-regulator/
Stablecoin Issuer Paxos Is Being Investigated by New York Regulator
"The scope of the crypto-related investigation is not yet clear.
The full scope of the investigation is unclear. Paxos’ stablecoins include the Pax dollar (USDP) and Binance USD (BUSD), a Binance-branded stablecoin offered through a white-label service.
A NYDFS spokesperson said the agency could not comment on ongoing investigations."
__

[virasog]

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/09/stablecoin-issuer-paxos-is-being-investigated-by-new-york-regulator/
Stablecoin Issuer Paxos Is Being Investigated by New York Regulator
"The scope of the crypto-related investigation is not yet clear.
The full scope of the investigation is unclear. Paxos’ stablecoins include the Pax dollar (USDP) and Binance USD (BUSD), a Binance-branded stablecoin offered through a white-label service.
A NYDFS spokesperson said the agency could not comment on ongoing investigations."
__

Tether has already faced such investigation and now these investigations against USDP and BUSD will add to the panic in the market. Also it is strange that the scope of these investigation is not clear or is deliberately not made the scope public.

I am not sure what will be the end result of these investigation but i am confident that BUSD will come out clean from these investigations.

[zasad@]

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/09/stablecoin-issuer-paxos-is-being-investigated-by-new-york-regulator/
Stablecoin Issuer Paxos Is Being Investigated by New York Regulator
"The scope of the crypto-related investigation is not yet clear.
The full scope of the investigation is unclear. Paxos’ stablecoins include the Pax dollar (USDP) and Binance USD (BUSD), a Binance-branded stablecoin offered through a white-label service.
A NYDFS spokesperson said the agency could not comment on ongoing investigations."
__

Tether has already faced such investigation and now these investigations against USDP and BUSD will add to the panic in the market. Also it is strange that the scope of these investigation is not clear or is deliberately not made the scope public.

I am not sure what will be the end result of these investigation but i am confident that BUSD will come out clean from these investigations.

For the last 3 months, very negative news about crypto regulation has been released. The situation with Protego and Paxos's petitions is also unclear.

With crypto banking on the brink, rumors are flying
https://fortune.com/crypto/2023/02/08/with-crypto-banking-on-the-brink-rumors-are-flying/

free
https://archive.is/jnxFx
"Unlike Anchorage, the final status of Protego and Paxos’s petitions remains uncertain. The OCC has dragged out the approval process—and with it, the companies’ ability to operate as national banks—beyond the 18-month deadline."

Some people are rumored to want to disrupt the connection between the banking world and the worlds of cryptocurrencies.

[bmwister]

I don't think much will change. Thus, the state will only tighten control over cryptocurrencies and computers. But these new rules will not protect companies from collapse or failure. Unfortunately, this does not depend on the rules.

But this is just my opinion. The authorities know what they are doing, after all.

[zasad@]

I don't think much will change. Thus, the state will only tighten control over cryptocurrencies and computers. But these new rules will not protect companies from collapse or failure. Unfortunately, this does not depend on the rules.

But this is just my opinion. The authorities know what they are doing, after all.

Yes, I also think that SEC will not have enough resources for all crypto projects, but they will make a lot of noise and make many people very nervous. The mass adoption of stablecoins is still very far away, I think 3-5 years, but for now it is necessary to reduce the growing number of stablecoins.

[zasad@]

https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/P200223-1.pdf
20 February 2023
"The financial stability outlook remains challenging. Inflation persists above target in many
jurisdictions. Despite easing recently, global financial conditions are significantly tighter than a
year ago and may undergo further tightening in the months to come. Economic growth has
slowed markedly in recent months. Whilst expectations of a ‘soft landing’ for the global
economy have grown, the outlook remains clouded by uncertainty. Emerging market and
developing economies (EMDEs) have been largely resilient thus far, but this backdrop may
present challenges to them as we move forward."

____
Before

https://www.fsb.org/2022/10/fsb-proposes-framework-for-the-international-regulation-of-crypto-asset-activities/
FSB proposes framework for the international regulation of crypto-asset activities

15 December 2022
https://www.circle.com/hubfs/Circle%20Internet%20Financial%20-%20Comments%20on%20FSB%20Consultation%20v2.pdf
RE: Proposed framework for the international regulation of crypto-asset activities and “global
stablecoins” – consultative response

____
USDC will probably continue to work

[sha420hashcollision]

scam coin pump and dumps ARE securities, bitcoin is a commodity

[Kryptowerk]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

While we talk about blame, I think especially in the case of FTX it has become apparant that as long as everybody involved (from the huge fish at FTX headquaters down to all the youtubers and other shills promoting FTX) makes good money, nobody even tries to take a look at all the red flags. So my personal stance on the matter is, money speaks, the responsibility for the FTX mess may be mostly within SBF and associates but goes a long way down to thousands of people involved that allowed the corrupt system to keep running for so long.

[aoluain]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

While we talk about blame, I think especially in the case of FTX it has become apparant that as long as everybody involved (from the huge fish at FTX headquaters down to all the youtubers and other shills promoting FTX) makes good money, nobody even tries to take a look at all the red flags. So my personal stance on the matter is, money speaks, the responsibility for the FTX mess may be mostly within SBF and associates but goes a long way down to thousands of people involved that allowed the corrupt system to keep running for so long.

100% and I would add a big percentage of people trying to make a profit from $hitcoins
dont realise that they are feeding that system, I didnt realise it when I was trading
$hitcoins.

Like wise the youtubers and ordinary people following and promoting FTX werent aware
of the corruption.

Stuff like this also gives the likes of the FED and ECB more excuses and reason to
lump Bitcoin in along with $hitcoins under the general term of Crypto.

[sha420hashcollision]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

While we talk about blame, I think especially in the case of FTX it has become apparant that as long as everybody involved (from the huge fish at FTX headquaters down to all the youtubers and other shills promoting FTX) makes good money, nobody even tries to take a look at all the red flags. So my personal stance on the matter is, money speaks, the responsibility for the FTX mess may be mostly within SBF and associates but goes a long way down to thousands of people involved that allowed the corrupt system to keep running for so long.

100% and I would add a big percentage of people trying to make a profit from $hitcoins
dont realise that they are feeding that system, I didnt realise it when I was trading
$hitcoins.

Like wise the youtubers and ordinary people following and promoting FTX werent aware
of the corruption.

Stuff like this also gives the likes of the FED and ECB more excuses and reason to
lump Bitcoin in along with $hitcoins under the general term of Crypto.

They can make up whatever BS they want as they have been for the entirety of Bitcoin's existence. This is a particular problem with shitcoins specifically. This is a problem with centralized companies acting like they provide the same guarantees as Bitcoin. They can blame themselves for not doing the research, lying to themselves and the public, and going all in on their own centralized pre-mined IOU receipt token of which there are thousands.

[safar1980]

Crypto effort in House gathers steam, could gain allies in Lummis, Gillibrand

An effort to overhaul how U.S. securities and commodities laws govern crypto markets is picking up momentum.
The House-led effort now has interest in the Senate, with the goal of releasing the legislation in late May.

https://www.theblock.co/post/227474/crypto-markets-bill-congress

[zasad@]

https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbase-takes-another-formal-step-to-seek-regulatory-clarity-from-sec-for
"Today Coinbase filed a narrow action in federal court to compel the SEC to respond yes or no to our July 2022 petition asking the SEC to use its formal rulemaking process to provide guidance for the crypto industry. The rulemaking process exists so that agencies can develop regulation with the benefit of public input, and have their position tested through judicial review. To date, more than 1,700 entities and individuals have submitted comments to Coinbase’s petition echoing the request for clarity. "

[Framelover]

Mt Gox and FTX aren't both company should be blamed, but the whole centralized exchanges should be blamed especially if they're included in this list [1]

It's not surprising regulation will keep coming because hacker is always clever and better rather than the current security, this is why everyone should avoid to use centralized exchange. If people are move all from centralized exchange to decentralized exchange, there's will no regulation coming due to security excuse, they only want to control everyone activity.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090869.0

It is essential to know that regulations can aid in improved security and protect investors, even though it’s important to hold centralized exchanges responsible for security violations.
Nevertheless, it is up to individuals to evaluate the risk and benefits of using centralized vs decentralized exchanges and make a decision based on their personal choice.

[ruftech705]

https://linktr.ee/rufmichael7053

[zasad@]

https://blockchain.news/news/coinme-fined-4-million-by-sec
"The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has fined Coinme, a cryptocurrency exchange, nearly $4 million for allegedly offering unregistered securities and making "misleading statements" about its crypto token, UpToken. Coinme, its subsidiary Up Global SEZC, and its CEO, Neil Bergquist, were charged by the SEC on April 28, with Up Global agreeing to pay a $3.52 million penalty, for which Coinme was also held liable. The SEC alleged that Coinme's Initial Coin Offering (ICO) of UpToken between October and December 2017 was an investment contract under the Howey test and was an unregistered securities offering. The ICO raised around $3.6 million to expand Coinme's fleet of Bitcoin ATMs, with the funds used to add 30 ATMs, and UP holders received benefits such as discounted fees and cashback when using the ATMs. However, in January 2019, Coinme changed its offering and partnered with Coinstar to use its cash-counting kiosks to facilitate cash-to-crypto transactions instead of its own ATMs. Coinme shut down all of its ATMs by July 2019, and there is currently no use for UpToken, with its market cap falling to around $50,000 and 24-hour trading volumes topping just over $180."
___
This exchange got off with a small fine.

[safar1980]

SEC Issues Largest-Ever Whistleblower Award

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the largest-ever award, nearly $279 million, to a whistleblower whose information and assistance led to the successful enforcement of SEC and related actions. This is the highest award in the SEC’s whistleblower program’s history, more than doubling the $114 million whistleblower award the SEC issued in October 2020.

[bbc.reporter]

I am not quite certain where to share this news article. This will become another attempt to disable the innovation being brought and enjoyed in the cryptospace.



A Democratic representative laid into witnesses during Wednesday’s joint hearing on crypto regulation, arguing that there is no way to effectively regulate crypto markets when they are subject to such “massive market manipulation.”

House Financial Services Committee member Bill Foster, D-Illi., argued that wash trading cannot be controlled without establishing federally-regulated “traceable digital identities” for all wallets and users.

“If we wish to prevent wash trading…is there any alternative to having both sides of every crypto transaction associated with a traceable digital identity and have that digital identity issued by a government with which we have extradition treaties and a common concept of financial fraud, is there any alternative to that?” Foster asked the panel of witnesses.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/self-custody-wallets-need-identities



In any case, I have argued against some people in the forum who tells everyone that regulations are good for adoption. However, it appears that they do not have any understanding on what regulations might imply on the cryptospace.

This is how I understand how regulations might be implemented and it will certainly not be good for adoption.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5447061.msg62196665#msg62196665

[zasad@]

I am not quite certain where to share this news article. This will become another attempt to disable the innovation being brought and enjoyed in the cryptospace.



A Democratic representative laid into witnesses during Wednesday’s joint hearing on crypto regulation, arguing that there is no way to effectively regulate crypto markets when they are subject to such “massive market manipulation.”

House Financial Services Committee member Bill Foster, D-Illi., argued that wash trading cannot be controlled without establishing federally-regulated “traceable digital identities” for all wallets and users.

“If we wish to prevent wash trading…is there any alternative to having both sides of every crypto transaction associated with a traceable digital identity and have that digital identity issued by a government with which we have extradition treaties and a common concept of financial fraud, is there any alternative to that?” Foster asked the panel of witnesses.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/self-custody-wallets-need-identities



In any case, I have argued against some people in the forum who tells everyone that regulations are good for adoption. However, it appears that they do not have any understanding on what regulations might imply on the cryptospace.

This is how I understand how regulations might be implemented and it will certainly not be good for adoption.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5447061.msg62196665#msg62196665

They still cannot determine which token or token is a commodity and which shares.
They learned how to track transactions on wallets and deal with scammers. Money does not like bans, and while they want to tighten regulation, there is hope for the emergence of new financial centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

[Woodie]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market.

Don't you think this regulation stance is 50/50, investors love to reduce their risk were possiblea and if regulation can minimise this risk I actually think the markets will actually grow.
Imagine trying to get a financing because of an illegal asset, this can never be approved and its a whitelisted one and this can happen with regulation.

I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed.

But I think markets arent as volatileas they were back then were losing or gaining a thousand dollars on price was easy.

Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

Crypto will always have its way around regulation, and strictnessa should not worry anybody

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

The argument is on regulatory clarity and how the SEC does not have a clear definition on what is an illegal security on much of the projects in the cryptospace. Also, you mention lobbying. Coinbase can lobby to influence the SEC, however, why is the SEC suing Coinbase based on accusations that cannot be backed because uncle Gary does not have the regulatory structure to bring these cases to completion?

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

The argument is on regulatory clarity and how the SEC does not have a clear definition on what is an illegal security on much of the projects in the cryptospace. Also, you mention lobbying. Coinbase can lobby to influence the SEC, however, why is the SEC suing Coinbase based on accusations that cannot be backed because uncle Gary does not have the regulatory structure to bring these cases to completion?

The SEC disagrees with your opinion.
They believe they are acting in accordance with US law.
Many projects preferred to negotiate with the regulator and pay fines.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coinbase-request-clarity-crypto-rules-112808455.html?
Coinbase Request for Clarity on Crypto Rules ‘Should Be Denied’, Says SEC

I have not read all the news today, and I will probably update the post. But I don't see any information that the SEC is suing. While I see a circus with a petition.
And while this is happening, secret negotiations are underway.

[bbc.reporter]

However, a judge disagrees with the SEC hehehe. There is also uncle Gary's case against Ripple Labs. Why has it not come to a conclusion if the SEC really can interpret and implement the rules and regulations in accordance to US law? It is very clear to anyone who follows cryptonews that uncle Gary and his team are having difficulties  because the rules are outdated and will kill the innovation being brought by the cryptospace.



SEC agents cannot explain to a federal judge what its policies and attitudes regarding virtual currencies are—or how they are going to impact the industry.

Many in the virtual currency industry have been confused and bedeviled by the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) gradual and ill-explained encroachment on their world, with frequent claims from SEC Chair Gary Gensler that most cryptocurrencies should be properly seen legally as "securities" that ought to be regulated by his agency. That would potentially make lots of legit businesses suddenly illegal dealers in "unregistered securities."

In a decision last week in an ongoing bankruptcy case of Voyager Digital Holdings, U.S. bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Wiles in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York laid into SEC agents for their perplexing and officious manner of trying to force through their attitudes about cryptocurrencies-as-securities.

Judge Wiles finds this situation highly aggravating, noting that "Voyager operated, and Binance.US currently operates, in a regulatory environment that at best can be described as highly uncertain."

Source https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

[zasad@]

However, a judge disagrees with the SEC hehehe. There is also uncle Gary's case against Ripple Labs. Why has it not come to a conclusion if the SEC really can interpret and implement the rules and regulations in accordance to US law? It is very clear to anyone who follows cryptonews that uncle Gary and his team are having difficulties  because the rules are outdated and will kill the innovation being brought by the cryptospace.



SEC agents cannot explain to a federal judge what its policies and attitudes regarding virtual currencies are—or how they are going to impact the industry.

Many in the virtual currency industry have been confused and bedeviled by the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) gradual and ill-explained encroachment on their world, with frequent claims from SEC Chair Gary Gensler that most cryptocurrencies should be properly seen legally as "securities" that ought to be regulated by his agency. That would potentially make lots of legit businesses suddenly illegal dealers in "unregistered securities."

In a decision last week in an ongoing bankruptcy case of Voyager Digital Holdings, U.S. bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Wiles in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York laid into SEC agents for their perplexing and officious manner of trying to force through their attitudes about cryptocurrencies-as-securities.

Judge Wiles finds this situation highly aggravating, noting that "Voyager operated, and Binance.US currently operates, in a regulatory environment that at best can be described as highly uncertain."

Source https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

I will also quote a little, the SEC has its own position, which they do not want to speak openly:
"And when he insisted on clarification from the SEC, its agents "initially asked if it could state its position only to me on an in camera basis, but I denied that request and ruled that to the extent the SEC wanted to say something further about its objection, it ought to be stated in the public forum, where all other interested parties could hear and understand the SEC's position.""
https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

In Ripple v. The SEC has not yet put an end to it, and Ripple has suffered huge losses in legal costs and has not been able to fully develop its project for several years.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Yes, Ripple Labs suffered losses in legal costs, however, the SEC is shown to be making cases not backed by clear regulations. If you are arguing for the SEC, do you really think that uncle Gary is a competent SEC chairman? I would very much disagree if you say yes hehehe.

Ripple had a small victory against the SEC on the Hinman documents. This proves that the SEC is not very transparent on their crackdowns on the different projects in the cryptospace. We already know that they do not have a real basis on what is an illegal security and what is not. Let us hope the Hinman documents will help classify much of the projects we support.



Ripple has secured a small victory against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) — shutting down the agency’s motion to seal internal files known as the “Hinman Speech documents.”

Those documents consist of SEC drafts and emails relating to a speech given by William Hinman, former Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, more than four years ago.

Hinman’s speech reportedly indicated the agency did not consider ether a security at the time. Ripple lawyers have fought to learn more about how Hinman came to that conclusion, which could impact XRP’s own classification.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/ripple-sec-hinman

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Yes, Ripple Labs suffered losses in legal costs, however, the SEC is shown to be making cases not backed by clear regulations. If you are arguing for the SEC, do you really think that uncle Gary is a competent SEC chairman? I would very much disagree if you say yes hehehe.

Ripple had a small victory against the SEC on the Hinman documents. This proves that the SEC is not very transparent on their crackdowns on the different projects in the cryptospace. We already know that they do not have a real basis on what is an illegal security and what is not. Let us hope the Hinman documents will help classify much of the projects we support.



Ripple has secured a small victory against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) — shutting down the agency’s motion to seal internal files known as the “Hinman Speech documents.”

Those documents consist of SEC drafts and emails relating to a speech given by William Hinman, former Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, more than four years ago.

Hinman’s speech reportedly indicated the agency did not consider ether a security at the time. Ripple lawyers have fought to learn more about how Hinman came to that conclusion, which could impact XRP’s own classification.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/ripple-sec-hinman

You asked an interesting question, which side am I on? I hate regulators, but in this market a lot of people and companies have already lost money, so regulation is needed, and without it further development is impossible. But not according to the laws of 1946.

https://twitter.com/iampaulgrewal/status/1658271335066505217
"The SEC also said that the public statements by Chair Gensler are not formal guidance or policy statements from the SEC and the public cannot rely on them as such. 5/7"
"Overall the SEC’s response reinforces Coinbase’s longstanding concern that our industry does not have clarity on what the SEC may consider to be within or outside its jurisdiction at any time, and it is likely to continue changing its mind along the way. 6/7"
paulgrewal.eth(C)

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am not asking you which side you will be on if being forced to choose. I am only making an argument if we can trust uncle Gary and the SEC to give a fair assessement on the exchanges, services and the projects in the cryptospace.

What is really shown to us is they do not regulate the cryptospace to protect the consumers. What they are doing is they use regulation to protect the interests of their backers from Wall Street and Main Street. If you did not notice, the cryptospace can become a big competitor against the traditional banking system.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. I am not asking you which side you will be on if being forced to choose. I am only making an argument if we can trust uncle Gary and the SEC to give a fair assessement on the exchanges, services and the projects in the cryptospace.

What is really shown to us is they do not regulate the cryptospace to protect the consumers. What they are doing is they use regulation to protect the interests of their backers from Wall Street and Main Street. If you did not notice, the cryptospace can become a big competitor against the traditional banking system.

Cryptocurrencies will not become competitors to the banking system. They will either be banned like in Pakistan or they will be heavily regulated like commercial banks. Defi projects will also have whitelists if you want to interact with them and KYC providers. The SEC will listen to the interests of the state and large banks that are its shareholders. I don't want to choose between shit and manure.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I do not disagree. The regulators will certainly choose to make criminals out of innocent users first before they give up their campaign on shutting down the cryptospace heheheh. It cannot be killed, however. There is no other way for us in having real ownership over our digital assets except through decentralized ledgers and databases. People will keep using them.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. I do not disagree. The regulators will certainly choose to make criminals out of innocent users first before they give up their campaign on shutting down the cryptospace heheheh. It cannot be killed, however. There is no other way for us in having real ownership over our digital assets except through decentralized ledgers and databases. People will keep using them.

https://metamask.io/
https://consensys.net/terms-of-use/
4.3 Taxes. Each party will be responsible, as required under applicable law, for identifying and paying all taxes and other governmental fees and charges (and any penalties, interest, and other additions thereto) that are imposed on that party upon or with respect to the transactions and payments under this Agreement. All fees payable by you are exclusive taxes unless otherwise noted. We reserve the right to withhold taxes where required.

I don’t know how many decentralized services and wallets there will be in 3-5 years, but all the popular wallets and services that exist now will most likely work with regulators for a while.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

America has also been losing their lead in blockchain development. Their share of developers has fallen from 40% down to 29%.



Crypto and blockchain technologies are the next wave of the Internet, with the potential to fundamentally change money, the financial system, and the Internet more broadly. That the U.S. is losing market share in blockchain software development highlights the need for the country to take action to preserve its preeminence in financial markets and related technologies.

Source https://www.developerreport.com/developer-report-geography

[zasad@]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

..

The more SEC will complicate the lives of crypto projects, the more dissatisfaction will be. MICA will be implemented in Europe and all wallets must be verified.
Large DEFI projects will also follow these principles and introduce whitelisting. I say that freedom will soon end. Other projects will also work, but not with the same liquidity and reliability.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

..

The more SEC will complicate the lives of crypto projects, the more dissatisfaction will be. MICA will be implemented in Europe and all wallets must be verified.
Large DEFI projects will also follow these principles and introduce whitelisting. I say that freedom will soon end. Other projects will also work, but not with the same liquidity and reliability.

MICA might only be the beginning of the regulators' agenda of killing the most important innovation that decentralization has give us, not your keys, not your coins.

In any case, on uncle Gary vs. Ripple, the Hinman docs will be revealed on June 13. It has a record of the speech made by Bill Hinman who argues that Bitcoin and Ethereum are not securities and transactions on these networks are not securities transactions. Ripple is trying to use this speech as evidence that the SEC does not consider Bitcoin and Ethereum as illegal securities and wants to open another argument that Ripple is also not an illegal security based on this speech.

If this officially and legally proves that Bitcoin and Ethereum are not securities and if it opens an argument for many altcoin projects to also not be securities, I speculate that this will certainly pump the whole cryptospace market hehehehe.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

..

The more SEC will complicate the lives of crypto projects, the more dissatisfaction will be. MICA will be implemented in Europe and all wallets must be verified.
Large DEFI projects will also follow these principles and introduce whitelisting. I say that freedom will soon end. Other projects will also work, but not with the same liquidity and reliability.

MICA might only be the beginning of the regulators' agenda of killing the most important innovation that decentralization has give us, not your keys, not your coins.

In any case, on uncle Gary vs. Ripple, the Hinman docs will be revealed on June 13. It has a record of the speech made by Bill Hinman who argues that Bitcoin and Ethereum are not securities and transactions on these networks are not securities transactions. Ripple is trying to use this speech as evidence that the SEC does not consider Bitcoin and Ethereum as illegal securities and wants to open another argument that Ripple is also not an illegal security based on this speech.

If this officially and legally proves that Bitcoin and Ethereum are not securities and if it opens an argument for many altcoin projects to also not be securities, I speculate that this will certainly pump the whole cryptospace market hehehehe.

MICA law does not require you to use custodial wallets. The regulator wants to know how many bitcoins and other coins are in your wallet and wants to control the payment of taxes on your cryptocurrencies.
The European regulator has no problem with bitcoin and etherium, and most likely these coins will be regulated as utility tokens.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Yes, not yet at present. However, if a project is declared as a security, it would be forced to either leave the American jurisdiction or register with the US SEC for compliance which, under securities laws, might force those projects to use government approved custodians and transfer agents.

This important information is presently being left unnoticed by much of the people in the cryptospace and it will be the most damaging on the greatest innovation that decentralized ledgers and database has brought us.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Yes, not yet at present. However, if a project is declared as a security, it would be forced to either leave the American jurisdiction or register with the US SEC for compliance which, under securities laws, might force those projects to use government approved custodians and transfer agents.

This important information is presently being left unnoticed by much of the people in the cryptospace and it will be the most damaging on the greatest innovation that decentralized ledgers and database has brought us.

I agree with you that SEC can kill any fledgling project. These are big risks, but I don't think SEC will kill Ethereum.
If the project has money, then it will be able to pay a fine in the USA and not be traded on American exchanges. And the number of US exchanges has been declining lately.
Or maybe a new type of assets will appear and crypto exchanges in the US will receive a license to trade such assets.
There are a lot of options for the development of events, but the legislation in Europe and some Asian countries treats cryptocurrencies with understanding and is not in a hurry to recognize cryptocurrencies as shares.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Witnessing what has happened within 2 weeks, it appears not to be the case with Gary Gensler as the head of the SEC. I warn not to underestimate where Gensler wants to go in his crackdown against the cryptospace. We might have forgotten that Ethereum's founders had their own ICO from July 14, 2014 to September 2, 2014.

This information can be used as part of the SEC's fear tactics in implying that Ethereum might be an illegal security.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Witnessing what has happened within 2 weeks, it appears not to be the case with Gary Gensler as the head of the SEC. I warn not to underestimate where Gensler wants to go in his crackdown against the cryptospace. We might have forgotten that Ethereum's founders had their own ICO from July 14, 2014 to September 2, 2014.

This information can be used as part of the SEC's fear tactics in implying that Ethereum might be an illegal security.

"The tail does not wag the dog" (C)
I said that ethereum is an exception to all the rules, and very influential world banks and corporations are behind this project.
So far, there are no coin registries in the US that say which coin is a product and which stock it is, but Ethereum has more chances to survive than all projects that had an ICO. Even if there is a fine, the fine will be related to the amount of money collected for the ICO. And this is a very ridiculous amount for such a project.

[Bushdark]

@zasad@. Yes, not yet at present. However, if a project is declared as a security, it would be forced to either leave the American jurisdiction or register with the US SEC for compliance which, under securities laws, might force those projects to use government approved custodians and transfer agents.

This important information is presently being left unnoticed by much of the people in the cryptospace and it will be the most damaging on the greatest innovation that decentralized ledgers and database has brought us.

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

[Who is John Galt?]

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The government cannot actually regulate bitcoin because it is decentralized. Therefore, it will regulate what it is very familiar with, centralized companies, among which are CEXs like Binance or Coinbase. And I wouldn't bet a farthing that governments (short of some offshore financial centres) won't heavily regulate centralized companies that are intermediaries for decentralized projects like bitcoin.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Yes, not yet at present. However, if a project is declared as a security, it would be forced to either leave the American jurisdiction or register with the US SEC for compliance which, under securities laws, might force those projects to use government approved custodians and transfer agents.

This important information is presently being left unnoticed by much of the people in the cryptospace and it will be the most damaging on the greatest innovation that decentralized ledgers and database has brought us.

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The SEC fights mainly with large projects, other projects do not have money and specialists for the courts. They are forced to close.
Binance and Coinbase have cooperated with all regulators, they do not need to be destroyed. Enough to write clear legislation.

[bbc.reporter]

Did Ripple and Brad Garlichouse save much of the projects in the cryptospace from uncle Gary? They won against lawsuit that the SEC started against them. XRP is now officially not a security.

It also appears the Hinman documents has helped persuade the judge that XRP is not an illegal security which might make a precedent that many projects in the cryptospace accused of being illegal securities are not really securities hehehe.



Ripple Labs notches landmark win in SEC case over XRP cryptocurrency

Source https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-says-sec-lawsuit-vs-ripple-labs-can-proceed-trial-some-claims-2023-07-13/

[zasad@]

Did Ripple and Brad Garlichouse save much of the projects in the cryptospace from uncle Gary? They won against lawsuit that the SEC started against them. XRP is now officially not a security.

It also appears the Hinman documents has helped persuade the judge that XRP is not an illegal security which might make a precedent that many projects in the cryptospace accused of being illegal securities are not really securities hehehe.



Ripple Labs notches landmark win in SEC case over XRP cryptocurrency

Source https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-says-sec-lawsuit-vs-ripple-labs-can-proceed-trial-some-claims-2023-07-13/

This is an excellent precedent, but it is too early to put an end to this matter.
SEC leaves door open for appeal in Ripple case
https://www.theblock.co/post/239537/sec-leaves-door-open-for-appeal-in-ripple-case
"Following a partial defeat in its longstanding case against Ripple Labs over the company's sale of its native token XRP, a spokesperson for the Securities and Exchange Commission left the door open for a possible appeal of the decision."

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. However, was it not mentioned by the judge that XRP is very much like a digital token and not something similar to an investment contract or a transaction that requires XRP to go through the howey test?

We cannot be certain who really has the correct interpretation, however, I very much agree with this statement.



Because the @SECGov and @GaryGensler refused to write clear rules for crypto, a judge just did it for them.

Source https://twitter.com/cameron/status/1679552793705578496?s=12&t=fx2RmsbaS0qNJTJTdpNu2w

[zasad@]

@zasad@. However, was it not mentioned by the judge that XRP is very much like a digital token and not something similar to an investment contract or a transaction that requires XRP to go through the howey test?

We cannot be certain who really has the correct interpretation, however, I very much agree with this statement.



Because the @SECGov and @GaryGensler refused to write clear rules for crypto, a judge just did it for them.

Source https://twitter.com/cameron/status/1679552793705578496?s=12&t=fx2RmsbaS0qNJTJTdpNu2w

In this process, many points have not yet been set.
A sale on an exchange is not a sale of a security, but the sale of tokens at a public sale and a private round to investors will most likely not pass the howey test, so there is a temporary positive moment on the market and companies have many questions about how to properly distribute tokens so that they don’t have problems in court.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am very worried what kind of storylines and doubts the SEC and the mainstream news media might create after this case. It is very important that we must not lose the idea of what the judge's ruling really implies.

From the information that I have read from the ruling, it appears the judge has clearly said that the tokens are not by themselves a contract, transaction that embodies the howey requirements. Read in page 15 of the ruling.

https://www.dropbox.com/e/scl/fi/bk1n1qn1tgscrcrrfldr8/SEC-v.-Ripple-Ruling-on-Motions-for-Summary-Judgment.pdf?dl=0&rlkey=cjyfdw5rl58diqxyi3qfgix7s

[Zoomic]

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The government cannot actually regulate bitcoin because it is decentralized. Therefore, it will regulate what it is very familiar with, centralized companies, among which are CEXs like Binance or Coinbase. And I wouldn't bet a farthing that governments (short of some offshore financial centres) won't heavily regulate centralized companies that are intermediaries for decentralized projects like bitcoin.

It might not be about bitcoin. Bitcoin is not alone in this industry and one other thing we need understand is that whenever exchanges are affected, it somehow impacts the whole cryptocurrency market and also bitcoin price inclusive.

All these regulation that is hitting exchanges, project owners and mixers is moving towards bitcoin. I perceive that the main target is bitcoin and they cannot get bitcoin directly, that is why they are beating around the bush.

[zasad@]

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The government cannot actually regulate bitcoin because it is decentralized. Therefore, it will regulate what it is very familiar with, centralized companies, among which are CEXs like Binance or Coinbase. And I wouldn't bet a farthing that governments (short of some offshore financial centres) won't heavily regulate centralized companies that are intermediaries for decentralized projects like bitcoin.

Governments can close all financial gateways for cryptocurrencies, and not only exchanges, but also banks and shadow exchanges in every country.

@zasad@. I am very worried what kind of storylines and doubts the SEC and the mainstream news media might create after this case. It is very important that we must not lose the idea of what the judge's ruling really implies.

From the information that I have read from the ruling, it appears the judge has clearly said that the tokens are not by themselves a contract, transaction that embodies the howey requirements. Read in page 15 of the ruling.

https://www.dropbox.com/e/scl/fi/bk1n1qn1tgscrcrrfldr8/SEC-v.-Ripple-Ruling-on-Motions-for-Summary-Judgment.pdf?dl=0&rlkey=cjyfdw5rl58diqxyi3qfgix7s

I am not the best specialist in American law, but with tokens there are still a lot of questions about the processes of their distribution among investors and the community. If someone knew a 100% legal way, they would have done it a long time ago.

[Bushdark]

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The government cannot actually regulate bitcoin because it is decentralized. Therefore, it will regulate what it is very familiar with, centralized companies, among which are CEXs like Binance or Coinbase. And I wouldn't bet a farthing that governments (short of some offshore financial centres) won't heavily regulate centralized companies that are intermediaries for decentralized projects like bitcoin.

It might not be about bitcoin. Bitcoin is not alone in this industry and one other thing we need understand is that whenever exchanges are affected, it somehow impacts the whole cryptocurrency market and also bitcoin price inclusive.

All these regulation that is hitting exchanges, project owners and mixers is moving towards bitcoin. I perceive that the main target is bitcoin and they cannot get bitcoin directly, that is why they are beating around the bush.

The cryptocurrency market is big and it will be hard for the government to try and enforce laws against the whole market that is why they are bringing out tough rules gradually do that it will not sound like they are coming for the while market but gradually regulating the crypto market. There is no way we can avoid that since the government has authority to determine how things will go all together. The regulation of the market is something we can't stop and prevent, all we need to do is to prepare for when that time will come and make necessary preparation.

[Zoomic]

The cryptocurrency market is big and it will be hard for the government to try and enforce laws against the whole market that is why they are bringing out tough rules gradually do that it will not sound like they are coming for the while market but gradually regulating the crypto market. There is no way we can avoid that since the government has authority to determine how things will go all together. The regulation of the market is something we can't stop and prevent, all we need to do is to prepare for when that time will come and make necessary preparation.

And we the masses are just lucky because it is not just one government that is controlling the whole world. While for instance the government of China will decided to be very strict in their regulation of cryptocurrency, the government of the United States might be lenient.  This therefore means that there will be different approaches and degrees of regulations across the countries.

If the government can approach the regulation with a clean mind and not intending to victimise the innocent, regulation will in no doubt bring stability and transparency in the cryptocurrency industry.

[zasad@]

I think this is one of the things that the Binance is struggling with now and it is making things hard for them. The SEC is currently not smiling and had been in a contention with both Binance and Coinbase and I think Coinbase is planning to leave the US if things does not tlstoll work out the way it ought to. The SEC had been very strict currently fighting against illegal and unregistered exchanges and cryptocurrency projects that is not abiding by the rules that is regulating them. I hope more of these regulations will not be enforced by the government of other countries against cryptocurrency exchanges and projects.

The government cannot actually regulate bitcoin because it is decentralized. Therefore, it will regulate what it is very familiar with, centralized companies, among which are CEXs like Binance or Coinbase. And I wouldn't bet a farthing that governments (short of some offshore financial centres) won't heavily regulate centralized companies that are intermediaries for decentralized projects like bitcoin.

It might not be about bitcoin. Bitcoin is not alone in this industry and one other thing we need understand is that whenever exchanges are affected, it somehow impacts the whole cryptocurrency market and also bitcoin price inclusive.

All these regulation that is hitting exchanges, project owners and mixers is moving towards bitcoin. I perceive that the main target is bitcoin and they cannot get bitcoin directly, that is why they are beating around the bush.

The cryptocurrency market is big and it will be hard for the government to try and enforce laws against the whole market that is why they are bringing out tough rules gradually do that it will not sound like they are coming for the while market but gradually regulating the crypto market. There is no way we can avoid that since the government has authority to determine how things will go all together. The regulation of the market is something we can't stop and prevent, all we need to do is to prepare for when that time will come and make necessary preparation.

In fact, this market is very easy to regulate if clear laws are written for all banks, companies and crypto exchanges. A good example of this is the European MICA law.
It is in the USA that the SEC still cannot figure out which Utility token and which Security token, that is, a share ..

[bbc.reporter]

Another good news article for people who think that the government are creating laws to serve the people better and protect the consumers hehehe.

After you read the news, if your argument is that the government is only treating cryptocoins similar to the laws that they have created for cash, then it appears that because of this law, the government has been surveilling on everyone who has made a $10k cash transaction or more.



Time is running out for the crypto industry to fight a new law that will force US businesses to collect personal information on people who use digital assets worth more than $10,000 to buy stuff.

The new rules will snap into action on January 1, 2024.

Last year, crypto think-tank Coin Center sued the Treasury Department and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, which have been charged with implementing the regulation, arguing the new rules are tantamount to “unconstitutional financial surveillance.”

Source https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/crypto-privacy-battle-started-by-words-inserted-in-2021-law/

[zasad@]

Another good news article for people who think that the government are creating laws to serve the people better and protect the consumers hehehe.

After you read the news, if your argument is that the government is only treating cryptocoins similar to the laws that they have created for cash, then it appears that because of this law, the government has been surveilling on everyone who has made a $10k cash transaction or more.



Time is running out for the crypto industry to fight a new law that will force US businesses to collect personal information on people who use digital assets worth more than $10,000 to buy stuff.

The new rules will snap into action on January 1, 2024.

Last year, crypto think-tank Coin Center sued the Treasury Department and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, which have been charged with implementing the regulation, arguing the new rules are tantamount to “unconstitutional financial surveillance.”

Source https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/crypto-privacy-battle-started-by-words-inserted-in-2021-law/

This is a predictable move. The most dangerous regulation could start with stablecoins, and all address holders with more than $10,000 could be given a deadline to go through the Know Your Customer process. Circle is an American company, and its stablecoins are used all over the world.
It is also dangerous to store savings in stablecoins now.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Agreed and it appears Paypal's entry in the stablecoin market might encourage other leaders in the traditional payment processor industry to create their own stablecoins also, which will certainly be enough to take away the influence of Tether and takeover much of the volume in the cryptospace market.

I have speculated that Tether might bring the crypto edition of the Big Short, however, should we really celebrate if Paypal and other traditional payment processors have taken over the stablecoin market? This might be a similar situation as Binance and the take over of traditional finance, the real criminals.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Agreed and it appears Paypal's entry in the stablecoin market might encourage other leaders in the traditional payment processor industry to create their own stablecoins also, which will certainly be enough to take away the influence of Tether and takeover much of the volume in the cryptospace market.

I have speculated that Tether might bring the crypto edition of the Big Short, however, should we really celebrate if Paypal and other traditional payment processors have taken over the stablecoin market? This might be a similar situation as Binance and the take over of traditional finance, the real criminals.

I have studied PYUSD.
https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/64d3a7987491e75ef9a15c6d

The prospect is very doubtful due to the risk of high fees for ERC-20 tokens. USDC capitalization has fallen by 30 billion over the past year because the crypto community does not trust the American regulator and companies. Tether looks more secure, but they will also have problems due to new regulations.

___
💩💩💩
https://twitter.com/pashovkrum/status/1688591468498239496

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Agreed and it appears Paypal's entry in the stablecoin market might encourage other leaders in the traditional payment processor industry to create their own stablecoins also, which will certainly be enough to take away the influence of Tether and takeover much of the volume in the cryptospace market.

I have speculated that Tether might bring the crypto edition of the Big Short, however, should we really celebrate if Paypal and other traditional payment processors have taken over the stablecoin market? This might be a similar situation as Binance and the take over of traditional finance, the real criminals.

I have studied PYUSD.
https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/64d3a7987491e75ef9a15c6d

The prospect is very doubtful due to the risk of high fees for ERC-20 tokens. USDC capitalization has fallen by 30 billion over the past year because the crypto community does not trust the American regulator and companies. Tether looks more secure, but they will also have problems due to new regulations.

___
💩💩💩
https://twitter.com/pashovkrum/status/1688591468498239496

It might be why Paypal has entered the stablecoin market. They know stricter regulations are coming and uncle Gensler might begin cracking them down. We should research on Paypal's latest hirings in the legal department hehe. They might have hired exgovernment employees and experts in regulatory compliance. Also, with Paypal being one of the biggest and well connected companies in America, they might be exempted from uncle Gary's crackdowns because of fear of long legal battles that they might not win.

However, agree on ERC20 and high fees but this is very easy to fix, very much similar to Tether when it transferred from Omni to Ethereum and presently now in Tron.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Agreed and it appears Paypal's entry in the stablecoin market might encourage other leaders in the traditional payment processor industry to create their own stablecoins also, which will certainly be enough to take away the influence of Tether and takeover much of the volume in the cryptospace market.

I have speculated that Tether might bring the crypto edition of the Big Short, however, should we really celebrate if Paypal and other traditional payment processors have taken over the stablecoin market? This might be a similar situation as Binance and the take over of traditional finance, the real criminals.

I have studied PYUSD.
https://coinmarketcap.com/community/articles/64d3a7987491e75ef9a15c6d

The prospect is very doubtful due to the risk of high fees for ERC-20 tokens. USDC capitalization has fallen by 30 billion over the past year because the crypto community does not trust the American regulator and companies. Tether looks more secure, but they will also have problems due to new regulations.

___
💩💩💩
https://twitter.com/pashovkrum/status/1688591468498239496

It might be why Paypal has entered the stablecoin market. They know stricter regulations are coming and uncle Gensler might begin cracking them down. We should research on Paypal's latest hirings in the legal department hehe. They might have hired exgovernment employees and experts in regulatory compliance. Also, with Paypal being one of the biggest and well connected companies in America, they might be exempted from uncle Gary's crackdowns because of fear of long legal battles that they might not win.

However, agree on ERC20 and high fees but this is very easy to fix, very much similar to Tether when it transferred from Omni to Ethereum and presently now in Tron.

It is a normal practice for all large companies in the US to hire former high officials who know how to promote the interests of the company, or in other words, how much to give bribes and to whom.
I will wait for the first audit of this stablecoin, but I am sure that most of the users' money will be used to buy US Treasuries. Without this condition, no company in the United States will be allowed to make their own stablecoin.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. It appears that you were correct. However, I do not think that this is a condition imposed by the American government. Paypal might be following the business model of Tether. On July 31, Tether has reported that they have $72 billion in treasuries all earning yield.



PayPal USD is “100% backed by U.S. dollar deposits, short-term U.S. Treasuries and similar cash equivalents,” according to a Monday press release. Additionally, PayPal’s stablecoin is redeemable 1:1 for U.S. dollars, which means one PayPal USD can be redeemed for one U.S. dollar and vice versa.

Source https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/10/paypal-launches-its-own-dollar-backed-stablecoin.html

[zasad@]

@zasad@. It appears that you were correct. However, I do not think that this is a condition imposed by the American government. Paypal might be following the business model of Tether. On July 31, Tether has reported that they have $72 billion in treasuries all earning yield.



PayPal USD is “100% backed by U.S. dollar deposits, short-term U.S. Treasuries and similar cash equivalents,” according to a Monday press release. Additionally, PayPal’s stablecoin is redeemable 1:1 for U.S. dollars, which means one PayPal USD can be redeemed for one U.S. dollar and vice versa.

Source https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/10/paypal-launches-its-own-dollar-backed-stablecoin.html

US Treasuries yield
https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates-bonds/government-bonds/us
Do you agree that the best way to protect investments is to diversify the company's funds?
If you agree with me, then you must agree that such companies should not buy US Treasuries for a large share of their assets.
I am not opposed to US Treasuries, but why buy these assets with most of the reserves?

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am not quite certain why hehehe. I also do not know what would be the best financial decision to manage $72 billion. However, if Tether and Paypal have trust the in American government and also have trust in their ability to once again get out of another economic crisis then for them it would be a good financial decision because they earn yield.

It is very much similar to us DeFi enjoyers who farm our stablecoins for yield but also taking the risk that the platform might be hacked or might be a rugpull hehehehe.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. I am not quite certain why hehehe. I also do not know what would be the best financial decision to manage $72 billion. However, if Tether and Paypal have trust the in American government and also have trust in their ability to once again get out of another economic crisis then for them it would be a good financial decision because they earn yield.

It is very much similar to us DeFi enjoyers who farm our stablecoins for yield but also taking the risk that the platform might be hacked or might be a rugpull hehehehe.

Do you like Warren Buffett?
I do not agree with all of his statements, although I begin to understand his phrase that "Bitcoin will cost 0 dollars."
It will happen, but maybe not soon.
I like his portfolio and investor approach
https://www.buffett.online/portfolio/
"Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway holds $127 billion in cash and cash equivalents (as investments in very short-term bonds are called)"
This is risk diversification. Why doesn't he invest in US Treasuries all in?

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Uncle Warren is one of the most successful and greatest of investors in the traditional market. How could we not like hehehe.

On why he does not invest everything in US treasuries, who can be certain on his investment tactics? We do not know. However, we can be certain that he wants to have cash that will always be prepared to buy certain value stocks that might be undervalued.

[zasad@]

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

[Bushdark]

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it. Bad projects and exchanges that had crashed is making the government have a rethink about the fear of there citizens getting scammed by fake projects.

[zasad@]

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it. Bad projects and exchanges that had crashed is making the government have a rethink about the fear of there citizens getting scammed by fake projects.

There is a big difference between saying "Bitcoin is a scam" or "Bitcoin will cost $0".
Warren Buffett has seen a lot of bubbles in the market and he is right about the risks of Bitcoin. As soon as the manipulators play enough with this asset, they can reset it or come up with other problems.

[Bushdark]

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it. Bad projects and exchanges that had crashed is making the government have a rethink about the fear of there citizens getting scammed by fake projects.

There is a big difference between saying "Bitcoin is a scam" or "Bitcoin will cost $0".
Warren Buffett has seen a lot of bubbles in the market and he is right about the risks of Bitcoin. As soon as the manipulators play enough with this asset, they can reset it or come up with other problems.

There is no asset that don't have manipulators even in the forex market. The big whales are always the ones that control the market most time to there own satisfaction. Bitcoin has not gained tya ground to repel any attempt to manipulate the market. The market is gradually gaining weight that will soon make it difficult for people to control the market easily. Yes Bitcoin has it own risk and everyone that is investing should be ready to measure there own risks.

[YOSHIE]

So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.

Since the phenomenon and bad things happened to MTGOX and FTX, many governments in every country are regulating or legalizing crypto asset trading nowadays, Various rules apply from all sides to exchanges and crypto, ranging from taxation and revenue operating rules in the country to dealing with losses for crypto users as a whole.

I am positive about the new existing Regulations against crypto, rules that contain strong definitions, principles, laws and conditions for every exchange and crypto asset that should be traded around the world, I hope that in the future it will be important to build a comprehensive foundation and legal framework for crypto, to ensure that every user is safe using the crypto industry, as a whole whether it's asset security, trading, investment and everything, for the future progress of crypto.

[bbc.reporter]

It appears that even if they had judges ruling against their regulatory claims, the SEC has again begun issuing another warning that more charges will be brought to more exchanges and DeFi platforms. I speculate that the SEC is only using their position to collect fines and settlement money from projects that they know will not fight them in court. Uncle Gary knows that the have lost already.



The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) isn’t done chasing down crypto exchanges and decentralized finance (DeFi) projects it sees as violating securities laws in the same vein as Coinbase Inc. (COIN) and Binance, said David Hirsch, head of the agency’s Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/09/19/us-secs-crypto-enforcement-chief-warns-more-charges-coming-to-exchanges-defi/

[HmmMAA]

Let's see how this will evolve https://www.theblock.co/post/251910/uk-bill-to-seize-illicit-crypto-moves-to-final-stages-of-approval

[zasad@]

Let's see how this will evolve https://www.theblock.co/post/251910/uk-bill-to-seize-illicit-crypto-moves-to-final-stages-of-approval

my opinion here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5467451.msg62875021#msg62875021

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it. Bad projects and exchanges that had crashed is making the government have a rethink about the fear of there citizens getting scammed by fake projects.

There is a big difference between saying "Bitcoin is a scam" or "Bitcoin will cost $0".
Warren Buffett has seen a lot of bubbles in the market and he is right about the risks of Bitcoin. As soon as the manipulators play enough with this asset, they can reset it or come up with other problems.

There is no asset that don't have manipulators even in the forex market. The big whales are always the ones that control the market most time to there own satisfaction. Bitcoin has not gained tya ground to repel any attempt to manipulate the market. The market is gradually gaining weight that will soon make it difficult for people to control the market easily. Yes Bitcoin has it own risk and everyone that is investing should be ready to measure there own risks.

I think the comparison with Forex is wrong.
It is very difficult to manipulate company shares or commodity prices in modern markets. The situation with Bitcoin is different, because most coins are not traded on markets but are stored somewhere.

[bbc.reporter]

Uncle Gary is being very cautious in what he might say in this testimony because it might be taken as a precedent by lawmakers and judges that other cryptocoins could also be argued as commodities. Also, he declared that bitcoin can be a security according to the interpetation of other laws. This Gensler should not be underestimated. Bitcoin maximalists cheer for him when he said that everything except bitcoin is a security, however, if he can find an interpretation in the law that bitcoin is a security, he will do it.

I also speculate that he is a bagholder of a token. This might be causing his hatred on the cryptospace hehehe. Did everyone watch the video of him where he shilled Algorand? He said Uber could exist inside of Algorand hehehehehe.



During recent testimony before Congress, SEC Chair Gary Gensler reiterated his belief that Bitcoin is not a security but declined to state whether it is a commodity.

When asked by Congressman Patrick McHenry if he believes Bitcoin is a security, Gensler responded that he, SEC staff, and prior chairs have said it does not meet the Howey Test that defines securities under US law.

However, when McHenry followed up, asking if that meant Bitcoin was therefore a commodity, Gensler showed reluctance. He stated that Bitcoin is not a security but that “the test is otherwise for other laws” regarding its categorization.

During the testimony, McHenry also criticized SEC Chair Gary Gensler over his lack of transparency around interactions with collapsed crypto exchange FTX and its founder, Sam Bankman-Fried.

Source https://watcher.guru/news/secs-gary-gensler-says-bitcoin-is-not-a-security

[Bushdark]

Let's see how this will evolve https://www.theblock.co/post/251910/uk-bill-to-seize-illicit-crypto-moves-to-final-stages-of-approval

my opinion here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5467451.msg62875021#msg62875021

Warren Buffett manages a lot of money, so he knows what he's doing. Other funds are also diversifying their risks, and companies that issue stablecoins that are pegged to the US dollar have come to believe in the safety of US Treasury bonds. hehe. These companies have no real capital.

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it. Bad projects and exchanges that had crashed is making the government have a rethink about the fear of there citizens getting scammed by fake projects.

There is a big difference between saying "Bitcoin is a scam" or "Bitcoin will cost $0".
Warren Buffett has seen a lot of bubbles in the market and he is right about the risks of Bitcoin. As soon as the manipulators play enough with this asset, they can reset it or come up with other problems.

There is no asset that don't have manipulators even in the forex market. The big whales are always the ones that control the market most time to there own satisfaction. Bitcoin has not gained tya ground to repel any attempt to manipulate the market. The market is gradually gaining weight that will soon make it difficult for people to control the market easily. Yes Bitcoin has it own risk and everyone that is investing should be ready to measure there own risks.

I think the comparison with Forex is wrong.
It is very difficult to manipulate company shares or commodity prices in modern markets. The situation with Bitcoin is different, because most coins are not traded on markets but are stored somewhere.

It is very certain that we can't compare the forex market with cryptocurrency market based in some certain aspects but we need to understand that there are different means we can manipulate the market which might not be obvious like we could ever think about. The forex market has it own method manipulation can done which could be different from cryptocurrency. Since the crypto market is still in the infantry age, there will be a lot for adjustments and balancing for it to be well organized. The whales control the crypto to there advantage which could be difficult for an ordinary trader to make profits from the market without updates.

[Zoomic]

Let's see how this will evolve https://www.theblock.co/post/251910/uk-bill-to-seize-illicit-crypto-moves-to-final-stages-of-approval

my opinion here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5467451.msg62875021#msg62875021

I think the comparison with Forex is wrong.
It is very difficult to manipulate company shares or commodity prices in modern markets. The situation with Bitcoin is different, because most coins are not traded on markets but are stored somewhere.

It is very certain that we can't compare the forex market with cryptocurrency market based in some certain aspects but we need to understand that there are different means we can manipulate the market which might not be obvious like we could ever think about. The forex market has it own method manipulation can done which could be different from cryptocurrency. Since the crypto market is still in the infantry age, there will be a lot for adjustments and balancing for it to be well organized. The whales control the crypto to there advantage which could be difficult for an ordinary trader to make profits from the market without updates.

If it is known that there is 21 million bitcoin that is available by default and out the 21 million, 18 million is currently in circulation. This means that no bitcoin has been lost either by carelessness of the bitcoin owner or by hack and we are also sure that no bitcoin is hiding anywhere in private wallets as zasad@ has said. This will enable everyone know the volume of bitcoin in circulation and as such control manipulation.
This is the reason the stocks and including the forex is different from cryptocurrency discussion ongoing here.

[zasad@]

More regulatory bodies are trying to fight over which of them will supposedly regulate crypto. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) was once also in one article on a crypto site demanding regulation in which crypto could also be their domain.

SEC,  FSOC, and CFTC have to make it clearer which of them is really going to regulate crypto. I guess all of them have thier own grand plan to have a grip on this industry, they got to take taxes. The problem is that crypto is borderless and US doesn't own the biggest CEX.

Coinbase Exchange operates in the USA. It is not the largest exchange in the world, but this exchange is certainly doing much better than Binance. And the USA is the largest financial market.
Control on the crypto market is already comparable to control over banking operations, and if there is no shadow market in the country, as in Russia, then most transactions will be under control.

[bbc.reporter]

They might not be doing this for the cryptospace however, it appears that this legal battle started by Elon Musk and Mark Cuban might help many projects in the cryptospace and protect it from uncle Gary's policy of regulation through enforcement.



Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk, has teamed up with American investor Mark Cuban to challenge the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]. Together, they have submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, aiming to highlight the SEC’s practice of conducting internal trials without juries. Their central argument revolves around the assertion that these administrative proceedings lead to disparate outcomes for individuals facing SEC charges.

Several argue that the SEC possesses an unfair edge when engaging in legal proceedings within its own jurisdiction.

Read in full https://watcher.guru/news/elon-musk-mark-cuban-join-forces-for-legal-battle-against-sec

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

This mignt be another good news hehe. It appears the argument can go on the opposite direction. The politicans who do not want self custody and argue that it is for everyone's safety can be argued that self custody is really for everyone's safety heheehe.



US Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) has introduced a new bill to protect the right of citizens to self-custody Bitcoin and other crypto. Indeed, Budd first introduced the bill to 118 Congress this week in a larger push for digital assets and financial freedom among United States citizens.

Dubbed the “Keep Your Coins Act”, the bill “protects an individual’s right to conduct transactions with cryptocurrency assets without the need to utilize a third-party intermediary.” Moreover, Budd has stated that the act seeks to prevent third-party risks to consumers amid the FTX collapse.

Source https://watcher.guru/news/us-senator-introduces-bill-to-protect-bitcoin-self-custody#google_vignette

[Poker Player]

~snip

It has all the logic in the world. Another thing is whether politicians follow the logic or follow other interests. Let me decide whether to assume the risks of self-custody or to leave my assets in the hands of a third party. This is more typical of totalitarian regimes than of democratic ones, wanting to impose that your Bitcoin holdings have to be guarded by third parties. Even if they don't force it, there will be a lot of people who will gladly leave their holdings in third parties, as it already happens, and as we have seen in cases such as the FTX mentioned above.

[zasad@]

News update.

This mignt be another good news hehe. It appears the argument can go on the opposite direction. The politicans who do not want self custody and argue that it is for everyone's safety can be argued that self custody is really for everyone's safety heheehe.



US Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) has introduced a new bill to protect the right of citizens to self-custody Bitcoin and other crypto. Indeed, Budd first introduced the bill to 118 Congress this week in a larger push for digital assets and financial freedom among United States citizens.

Dubbed the “Keep Your Coins Act”, the bill “protects an individual’s right to conduct transactions with cryptocurrency assets without the need to utilize a third-party intermediary.” Moreover, Budd has stated that the act seeks to prevent third-party risks to consumers amid the FTX collapse.

Source https://watcher.guru/news/us-senator-introduces-bill-to-protect-bitcoin-self-custody#google_vignette

I saw this news but did not attach any importance to it, because in the USA there are a lot of bills that will never become laws.
Cryptocurrencies in the United States will be controlled like bank deposits, or even more strictly if the cryptocurrencies have an unclear origin story.
According to him, such a bill simply does not have a chance.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad. However, the importance of this news is that there are also politicians who are not against bitcoin and who are not against the people's right to self custody and also not against creating transactions in the cryptospace without a middleman. We should begin taking these politicians more serious, I reckon.

[bbc.reporter]

I am not quite sure where to share this news, however, if this proposal is passed and approved, this might cause uncle Gary to submit his registration and end his chairmanship of the SEC eariler. It will certainly be a bullish moment for bitcoin and all of the cryptospace.

The skeptical me is thinking that this lawmaker is one of Blackrock's politicians that they carry in their pocket like nickels and dimes heehehe.



Rep. Tim Burchett of the United States introduced an amendment to the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) bill that proposes to cut Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler's compensation to $1 per year.

The amendment was submitted as part of a larger campaign to defund the regulatory agency and to dramatically slash government expenditure.

Gensler's pay as SEC Chair is now reported to be more than $300,000 per year. Burchett's proposed amendment would reduce his compensation to a symbolic $1, emphasizing the legislator's desire to limit the regulator's authority.

Source https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-lawmaker-proposed-slash-gary-052849898.html

[bbc.reporter]

Uncle Gary's SEC mafia appears to have been scolded by a judge for giving false information. This type of trickery is beginning to become more noticeable and it appears that different judges have been not agreeing to their statements and their methods.

I speculate on 2024 we might witness more requests to remove Uncle Gary from office. There are lawmakers that have proposed to cut his salary to $1.



A judge rebuked the SEC over its conduct involving crypto firm DEBT Box, saying the agency had made “materially false and misleading representations” in order to freeze the company’s assets, Fortune reported.

In August, the SEC alleged DEBT Box had defrauded investors out of $50 million, obtained a temporary restraining order and seized company assets.

US District Judge Robert Shelby explained in a filing this week that he had granted the SEC’s urgent request because it claimed DEBT Box had closed bank accounts within the previous 48 hours in preparation to move beyond the reach of US regulators, the report said.

The claim regarding bank accounts turned out to be false. Shelby said that some of the SEC’s arguments were “entirely without merit and misstate the record.” Still, research from blockchain analytics firm TRM Labs supported the SEC’s central allegation that DEBT Box misled investors, according to the report.

Source https://www.dlnews.com/articles/snapshot/judge-scolds-sec-over-methods-in-freezing-crypto-assets/

[zasad@]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/jp-morgan-ceo-jamie-dimon-hypocrite-crypto-criminals-shut-down
"Crypto is for criminals? JPMorgan has been fined $39B and has its own token
Crypto proponents on X wasted no time pointing out the hypocrisy of JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon’s recent remarks about Bitcoin and crypto to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs."

https://twitter.com/JohnEDeaton1/status/1732474820078588309?
"Talk about being a fucking hypocrite! Who’s the criminal Jamie Dimon? Let me ask you a question: In the last 5 years when jpmorgan
has been FINED over THIRTY FIVE BILLION DOLLARS ($35,000,000,000) for illicit and fraudulent activities, did any of your staff use #Bitcoin or Crypto?"

[bbc.reporter]

More news from uncle Gary and the SEC. It appears for uncle Gary, he does not care that Binance has made a settlement with the department of justice. The cases filed by the SEC against Binance will continue.

The skeptical me thinks that because the DOJ has extorted $4 billion from Binance, uncle Gary wants his share also heheheh.



The Securities and Exchange Commission says Binance Holdings Ltd.’s recent $4.3 billion settlement with the Justice Department and other US authorities bolsters its own case against the world’s biggest crypto exchange.

Despite not being part of the agreement, the SEC argued on Friday that the federal court in Washington hearing its case should weigh admissions by Binance and the firm’s former chief executive, Changpeng Zhao, in the Nov. 21 settlement. The firm and Zhao have asked the court to dismiss the SEC’s lawsuit.

The agreement didn’t include the SEC, which sued the exchange and Zhao in June for allegedly mishandling customer funds, misleading investors and regulators, and breaking securities rules.

Source https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-08/sec-says-its-binance-case-should-advance-despite-doj-settlement


Why was uncle Gary's department not included with the deal?

[zasad@]

More news from uncle Gary and the SEC. It appears for uncle Gary, he does not care that Binance has made a settlement with the department of justice. The cases filed by the SEC against Binance will continue.

Maybe they realized that they could take more

https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-expands-coalition-of-banking-committee-support-for-bill-cracking-down-on-cryptos-use-in-money-laundering-drug-trafficking-sanctions-evasion
"Warren Expands Coalition of Banking Committee Support for Bill Cracking Down on Crypto’s Use in Money Laundering, Drug Trafficking, Sanctions Evasion
5 New Senators Join as Cosponsors, Including 3 Members of Banking Committee
Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act Closes Loopholes and Combats Money Laundering, Ransomware Attacks, Sanctions Evasion, Drug Trafficking, Elder Fraud, and Other Illicit Financial Activities Using Crypto "

[safar1980]

Statement on the Denial of a Rulemaking Petition Submitted on behalf of Coinbase Global, Inc

Existing laws and regulations already apply to the crypto securities markets.
There is nothing about the crypto securities markets that suggests that investors and issuers are less deserving of the protections of our securities laws. Congress could have said in 1933 or in 1934 that the securities laws applied only to stocks and bonds. Instead, Congress included a long list of 30-plus items in the definition of a security, including the term “investment contract.”

As articulated in the famous Supreme Court decision, SEC v. W.J. Howey Co., an investment contract exists when there is the investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits to be derived from the efforts of others. The Howey Court said that the definition of an investment contract “embodies a flexible, rather than a static, principle, one that is capable of adaptation to meet the countless and variable schemes devised by those who seek the use of the money of others on the promise of profits.” This test has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court numerous times—the Court cited Howey as recently as 2019.

[bbc.reporter]

In India, it appears there might be no regulations incoming for the cryptospace hehehe. They will ban the websites of 9 of the most popular exchanges which will include Kucoin, Binance and Kraken. What I am afraid of is this might also start spreading in other jurisdictions and they also will start banning the websites of these exchanges from being accessed in their countries.



According to recent reports, India is set to ban 9 crypto exchange URLs in a move from the country’s Financial Intelligence Unit. indeed, they have called for the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to block the URLs for exchanges like Binance, Kraken, and others.

The move will also affect Huobi, Kucoin, Bittrex, Gate.io, Bitstamp, Bitfinix, and MEXC Global. Moreover, a press release revealed that the ban occurred after these virtual asset service providers (VASP) were not in compliance with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Source https://watcher.guru/news/india-to-ban-9-crypto-exchange-urls-including-binance-kraken

[peaky-btc4]

“If we wish to prevent wash trading…is there any alternative to having both sides of every crypto transaction associated with a traceable digital identity and have that digital identity issued by a government with which we have extradition treaties and a common concept of financial fraud, is there any alternative to that?” Foster asked the panel of witnesses.

[gaserrayu]

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it.

[bbc.reporter]

It is these types of news articles that manipulate the minds of the people who do not participate in the cryptospace or are not part of the community. It is very head shaking because those types of people will believe anything they read from the manipulative and corrupt mainstream news industry.

My argument against this is, it might be because the cryptospace for finance is faster, cheaper, more anonymous, more private and much better to use for everyone including criminals.



US Treasury says criminals and scammers are increasingly turning toward crypto

Source https://www.theblock.co/post/276548/us-treasury-says-criminals-and-scammers-are-increasingly-turning-toward-crypto

[Mst.Wangdan$]

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it.

Bitcoin will never be at a fixed price because it is a crypto currency 💹 and every country's economy can never fix it to a fixed price so it will never be what you think it will be.

[zasad@]

Warren Buffett is still a Bitcoin sadist till today and he doesn't believe that Bitcoin have any monetary value at all but that one is left to him. There are many people that had been asking for the regulation of Bitcoin by the government because of so many big scams that had happened before now. If Bitcoin ever get regulated, it are not going to be the same again like we used to enjoy it.

I'm not a big fan of Warren Buffett, but I like his thoughts and sometimes agree with them. Warren Buffett said one brilliant phrase that "Bitcoin will someday cost $0". This should not be taken literally. He understands that the price of Bitcoin will be manipulated and says that the price of Bitcoin will first reach certain heights, and then will remain at the bottom for a very long time, because manipulators will no longer be interested in this asset. But he doesn't tell us when this will happen.

[bbc.reporter]

On the speculation that the government will only allow individuals that are on a certain wage bracket to trade cryptocoins, it appears Merril Lynch has already started this on their bitcoin ETF market desk. This might only be a rumor at present, however, there are people in social saying that if a client is not a high networth individual then he is not allowed to trade bitcoin ETFs.

The skeptical me thinks this is a method to restrict ordinary people from having entry to good investment opportunities. The SEC would use the reason that they are only protecting consumers, however, I reckon they are there only to protect the rich.

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

It appears that when these lawmakers witness that bitcoin is pumping very vigorously, it comes back on their agenda and begin their fud campaign again hehehheeh. These people who are funded by tax payer's money should ge ashamed. They certainly do not care about solving the problem on moneylaundering and terrorist financing. I reckon if they wanted to solve this problem, they would start crackdown on banks and money processors. Fiat is still the biggest medium of exchange for terrorism and crime.



The extent to which crypto is used to finance bad actors like drug dealers and militant organisations is worse than analysts estimate, Congress was told on Thursday.

The role of crypto in illicit financing is currently a topic of bitter debate among lawmakers.

The crypto industry likes to cite research showing that money laundering accounts for a tiny fraction of crypto transaction volume — 0.62% in 2022, according to Chainalysis.

But these figures underestimate the extent of crypto’s role in illicit finance, Carole House told Congress on Thursday, because they don’t account for offchain activity.

During a separate hearing in the House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday, Brian Nelson, undersecretary of Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, conceded that crypto’s role in terror financing is limited.

“Terrorists still prefer, frankly, to use traditional products and services,” he said.

Read in full https://www.dlnews.com/articles/regulation/crypto-crime-worse-than-reported-expert-tells-lawmakers/

[bbc.reporter]

News update. Another fud campaign from the American government creared through the treasury department.

I reckon before they inspect carefully every transaction created on bitcoin and the cryptospace, I reckon that they first should be it on the banks within their jurisdiction. The biggest currency used as a medium of exchange for terrorist financing is the American dollar!



Financial institutions have reported $165 million in potential crypto transactions that may be tied to Hamas, according to the bureau of the U.S. Treasury department that combats terrorism financing.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network analyzed suspicious activity reports filed between January 2020 and October 2023, according to a letter signed by Deputy Treasury Secretary Adewale Adeyemo. The letter, reviewed by CoinDesk, was directed to the leaders of the Senate Banking and House Financial Services Committees and asked for their support in passing legislation that would broaden the Treasury Department's oversight authority over crypto transactions.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/03/14/fincen-is-analyzing-165m-in-transactions-that-may-tie-crypto-and-hamas-senior-official-says/

[zasad@]

News update. Another fud campaign from the American government creared through the treasury department.

The same thing is happening in Russia. The largest bank, Sberbank, conducted a study of the shadow market and found that many people have many bank cards and make money from this by selling their bank cards.
The situations are different, but the bank is lobbying for an increase in its own powers to control bank transfers.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. However, the difference is that they have not proven that those transactions were done for terrorist financing. This is very dangerous because they can look at the blockchain, choose a group of transactions and declare that they might be transactions used for terrorist financing then use this allegation to get an executive order against their targets. The targets does not have to he the terrorists, it can be organizations they do not like. This is very headshaking that much of us in the community do not see this.

They will repeat this tactic repeatedly to get more authority and decrease the people's freedom through these executive orders. I am quite certain in the next few months the next transactions chosen will be declared to be from the Lazarus Group hehehehee.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. However, the difference is that they have not proven that those transactions were done for terrorist financing. This is very dangerous because they can look at the blockchain, choose a group of transactions and declare that they might be transactions used for terrorist financing then use this allegation to get an executive order against their targets. The targets does not have to he the terrorists, it can be organizations they do not like. This is very headshaking that much of us in the community do not see this.

They will repeat this tactic repeatedly to get more authority and decrease the people's freedom through these executive orders. I am quite certain in the next few months the next transactions chosen will be declared to be from the Lazarus Group hehehehee.

The social rating system has existed for a long time, it’s just that people tend to remain silent about it. And all applications are considered to be accidental.
For example, if you say the wrong things, despite freedom of speech, then your bank accounts are blocked, you are not notified of benefits, if you have a business, then checks begin there, and so on, so that the person shuts up.
And for fools, the government shows opposition clowns who are subordinates and carry out assigned tasks.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am not quite certain what you are implying when you mentioned the social rating system because those wallets in the blockchain are anonymous. However, I agree that there are these wallets that were involved in receiving stolen coins but what I am arguing about are the identities of the wallets. Lazarus Group's wallet is only an allegation that it belongs to North Korean hackers. We cannot be sure that there are North Korean hackers because we do not know or cannot prove that they have good programmers and computer scientists in their country. They might not also have internet hehehehe.

[FinneysTrueVision]

@zasad@. I am not quite certain what you are implying when you mentioned the social rating system because those wallets in the blockchain are anonymous. However, I agree that there are these wallets that were involved in receiving stolen coins but what I am arguing about are the identities of the wallets. Lazarus Group's wallet is only an allegation that it belongs to North Korean hackers. We cannot be sure that there are North Korean hackers because we do not know or cannot prove that they have good programmers and computer scientists in their country. They might not also have internet hehehehe.

Blockchain analysis and digital forensics used to blame North Korea are both examples of pseudoscience being weaponized by governments in order to take more rights away and to weaken those they see as enemies. Just like the Sony hack, the evidence wasn’t entirely convincing — North Korea is just an easy scapegoat. When people have been conditioned through endless propaganda not many are willing to question the official narrative, regardless of how dubious it might seem upon closer inspection. As long as they are told it’s for their own protection everyone just accepts that now everything will require more and more privacy invasion, they aren’t allowed to use privacy tech, and they are heavily restricted by how they can spend and transfer their money.

[zasad@]

bbc.reporter, We usually think that our wallets are anonymous, but in reality there are many ways to find the owner. For example, when a person looks at the blockchain explorer, his IP is recorded and analyzed. and VPN will not always help limit anonymity. But most of life does not happen on the blockchain, and a person can be punished through a social rating system if he is bad in the opinion of the country's government.