131–140 of 328 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was Carlos indicted as well?
Carlos was not really a part of Bitconnect. IIRC he just showed up to some event and did such a good job riling up the crowd that they started making him part of the show.
undying classic from carlos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFwlWLtsw6c
Most of the early yelling is done at 1:04. Then you get the guts of his talking points.
Make massive financial gains, the gains are due to faith and belief that by purchasing this currency you will be responsible for changing the world.
This guy’s intro / enthusiasm is a long running joke between a pal and me. Crypto price is up? Bitconnect…! Price is down? Bitconnect…! In a pinch, the screaming and stomping around encapsulates anything crypto.
Really, it is a notable performance of “hype man.”
Nice job. Now if only some people would see the difference between an actual ponzi scheme like this one and bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. That would be nice.
The fact that cryptocurrencies are even Ponzier than any Ponzi scheme, more pyramidal than any pyramid scheme, much getter, richer, and quicker than any get-rich-quick scheme, and more shaggily carpeted and vigorously jerked than any rug-pull scheme, doesn't mean they're not scams. Edit: when shills gets called on purposefully missing the point by arguing over semantics, they switch to outright denial and making stuf…
I think I replied in a respectful way to your original comment that was essentially just poisoning the well. I also feel it's a bit dishonest to reply to my comment by editing your post. You are now deliberately trying to discredit what I say by calling me a shill, this is not how we can have a curious discussion.
What is it that I am outright denying and making up?
Just claiming something is a scam doesn't make it so, you have to provide some sort of arguments to support your thesis.
Interesting that there is no mention that he has been charged of being involved in a Ponzi scheme in the headline - just "Cryptocurrency Scheme".
Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud—Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1349
Maximum penalty: Twenty years in prison, forfeiture, restitution, and $250,000 fine
Wire Fraud—Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1343
Maximum penalty: Twenty years in prison, forfeiture, restitution, and $250,000 fine
Conspiracy—Title 18, U.S.C., Section 371
Maximum penalty: Five years in prison, and $250,000 fine
Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business—Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1960
Maximum penalty: Five years in prison, forfeiture, and $250,000 fine
Money Laundering Conspiracy—Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1956(h)
Maximum penalty: Twenty years in prison, forfeiture, and $250,000 fine
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/founder-fraudulent-cryp...
Crypto may well be the biggest solution looking for a problem I've ever seen. Apart from the obvious issues (eg energy expenditure) the one myth that needs to die about crypto is that it is extragovernmental and indictments such as this and the Bitfinex laundering case recently should underline that. The simple fact is that the developed world could shut down what little utility cryptocurrencies (and NFTs) have tomor…
How is it irrelevant? The ban in China did not affect the operation of the network.
With regard to the "move", this is plagued by the same flaw the energy consumption statistics are: you don't know where the miners are. Not acknowledging this limitation is somewhere between disingenuous and stating a falsehood.
This does not demonstrate that developed nations "could shut it down tomorrow".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The common characteristic is that "early adopters" get disproportionately large returns compared to later adopters. Indeed those later adopters are financing the exit of the participants who "got in first". In this way it's like a Ponzi scheme, but the same could be said for stocks. You might call the above a simplification; that is fine -- my point is that this is a (inaccurate) linguistic shorthand -- calling somet…
It's grossly untrue to say it's a Ponzi scheme "like stocks" which are part ownership in companies that actually sell things in the real world and are valued by the present value of their future expected cash flows, rather than cryptocurrencies which have no such relationship to the real world, and some would argue are valued entirely on the premise of returns that can only be sustained by finding the next sucker.
Crypto may well be the biggest solution looking for a problem I've ever seen. Apart from the obvious issues (eg energy expenditure) the one myth that needs to die about crypto is that it is extragovernmental and indictments such as this and the Bitfinex laundering case recently should underline that. The simple fact is that the developed world could shut down what little utility cryptocurrencies (and NFTs) have tomor…
Cryptocurrency is the solution for a very valuable problem. How do you commit financial crimes and frauds in a way just new enough to confuse people that what you're doing may be valuable?
Crypto may well be the biggest solution looking for a problem I've ever seen. Apart from the obvious issues (eg energy expenditure) the one myth that needs to die about crypto is that it is extragovernmental and indictments such as this and the Bitfinex laundering case recently should underline that. The simple fact is that the developed world could shut down what little utility cryptocurrencies (and NFTs) have tomor…
Cryptocurrency is the solution for a very valuable problem. How do you commit financial crimes and frauds in a way just new enough to confuse people that what you're doing may be valuable?
I found this notable. The messaging is clear: the DoJ supports crypto within whatever the current legal framework is.