51–60 of 189 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you might as well just use an SQL database
“Proof of authority” chains are a lot more than just a database. There is still a verifiable audit trail etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you might as well just use an SQL database
“Proof of authority” chains are a lot more than just a database. There is still a verifiable audit trail etc.
Problem with Ripple is creation of new XRPs, they had full control over that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they were saving a "slam dunk" for a politically-opportune moment.
What makes now a politically opportune moment?
The bankers are loaded with Bitcoin now (with Bitcoin having gone fully mainstream on Wall Street), so maybe it's time to eliminate/weaken some of the perceived competition.
Or, because Bitcoin is at $22,500 and they'd like to tarnish the crypto market a bit if they can, cast it as a shady place, drive down institutional interest via scandal and government prosecution. It's a plausible serious competitor to fiat currencies in the coming decades. The ideal scenario for the major central banks - they who rule fiat - is that Bitcoin goes to zero.
The clowns that run this world frequently view gold as a problem, a threat, and they work hard to suppress its value. They also occasionally get caught doing so. If they can figure out a good way to do it, they may assault the value of Bitcoin, directly or indirectly, given the chance.
Who has a vested interest in not seeing fiat currencies weaken as the central financial instrument of every major economy? Pretty much everyone that controls everything today, the entrenched.
And one other very plausible reason: this is being fired off just before an administration switch-over, because the people that have pushed for it may think it'll get lost in the shuffle, as the new administration will have its own priorities it will want pursued (such that this could get pushed down the list or neglected). It often happens in government right before admin switch-over, it's why all the anti-trust cases were rushed and fired off right before the presidency changes hands.
Is this a get-rich quick schema, or what exactly?
Are you all hoping for a Lambo out of this?
Won’t have an impact on the broader crypto market, but it will signal that the US is diehard anti-crypto. So many companies have already moved offshore, anyone trying to play in the US should get out ASAP. Who is the SEC protecting? Anyone who has bought XRP doesn’t give a shit.
Ripple isn't really a crytocurrency, it's certainly not a decentralized cryptocurrency. I don't think this is likely to send a signal that the US is "anti-crypto", though I'll have to see the litigation to know for sure. When ripple was created many people in the cryptocurrency space had or were considering doing something similar and many reached the conclusion that what ripple went on to do would be unambiguously u…
I don't think they've deceived anyone. It takes I can't believe I'm defending Ripple. I think anyone who buys XRP is making a very unwise decision, precisely because the government does ridiculous things like this all the time.
I wish the government wouldn't do things like this and Bitcoin had no use case. But alas, governments will continue to suck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they were saving a "slam dunk" for a politically-opportune moment.
What makes now a politically opportune moment?
Announced three days ago. Public comment period ends right after New Year's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes now a politically opportune moment?
That depends on who you think is pulling the strings behind the scenes. The bankers are loaded with Bitcoin now (with Bitcoin having gone fully mainstream on Wall Street), so maybe it's time to eliminate/weaken some of the perceived competition. Or, because Bitcoin is at $22,500 and they'd like to tarnish the crypto market a bit if they can, cast it as a shady place, drive down institutional interest via scandal and…
How do you feel about the theory of BTC acting as a controlled opposition to gold?
I find it interesting that the same CNBC commentators who slam gold promote BTC as "digital gold". If gold is so useless in their eyes, why is intangible "digital gold" being pushed? Despite the anti-establishment veneer of BTC, it is accepted and promoted by the MSM. Gold is still derided.
There's a parallel with the captured, walled-garden Internet. BTC's lack of usability, Mnuchin's words on self-hosted wallets all point to this so called disruptive technology being captured. Similarly, platforms like PayPal taking an interest in BTC point in the same direction.
Looks more and more like a steppingstone, positioning of goal posts towards CBDC.