Token Daily

b2a872 44 mins ago

Thats an admission that if it were true, it would be damaging and a big deal.

1

You should check the askTS sub. They ate this story up, and I'm laughing my ass off. "so you're saying, a unicorn flew to Delaware and dropped off the laptop?" "yes!"

1

LifeStraggler4 3 hs ago

Joe Biden has been remarkably restrained... if I encountered the same as him I'll have gone 'Leave my kids the F*£& out of this!'

1

frognuts123 3 hs ago

What the hell is happening over there

1

PoliticsModeratorBot 4 hs ago

Hi tronic22. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, your submission has been removed for the following reason:

Already Submitted: This article has been submitted to /r/politics within the last three days:

https://redd.it/jeh4ej

I'm a bot and sometimes I make mistakes. If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/tronic22&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this submission.)

1

boomermax 4 hs ago

Paraphrased... Sort of...

"We have no new information. We believe it may be. No we don't work for the agency anymore. But if we're right...."

1

MajesticMulva 4 hs ago

Former officials sign a letter based on their beliefs.....

offer no evidence.....

say "If we are right".....

“We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”......

Then why the fuck should I listen to you

1

SaltHash :ivoted: I voted 4 hs ago

Giuliani already admitted he gave his bullshit to the NY Post because other publications would have fact checked it.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/rudy-giuliani-admits-he-gave-hunter-biden-story-to-ny-post-because-it-wouldnt-be-fact-checked/

It is ridiculous that our society is wasting time with this obvious bullshit.

1

CptMcTavish 4 hs ago

Democrats cannot make any wrongdoings. They are noble saints, and any claim to the contrary is russian propaganda.

2

NoAnswerYet 4 hs ago

Fake news. John Ratcliffe said it wasn't Russia /s

1

Moon_over_homewood 4 hs ago

They keep saying “disinformation” but never actually seem to deny the claims. Very strange. Also, we should trust the intelligence agencies whose job is to lie and kill and keep secrets. Seems legit.

1

Yukon-C-14 4 hs ago

You won’t trust intelligence agencies but you’ll trust Giuliani who only gave the “story” to the New York post because they wouldn’t fact check it? Seems legit.

1

garry_shandling_ :flag-ok: Oklahoma 4 hs ago

Disinformation inherently implies a lack of validity of the claims. There's nothing strange about it. And yes, we should trust them, because they know what they're doing. Just because you don't understand how national security, intelligence agencies, and foreign policy all operate doesn't mean that they don't work or aren't trustworthy.

1

SaltHash :ivoted: I voted 4 hs ago

>They keep saying “disinformation” but never actually seem to deny the claims. Very strange. Also, we should trust the intelligence agencies whose job is to lie and kill and keep secrets. Seems legit. Right...Because we're supposed to conveniently believe the claims are legit when Giuliani purposefully passed this B.S. on to a publication that would not fact check it. [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/media/new-york-post-hunter-biden.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/media/new-york-post-hunter-biden.html) [https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/rudy-giuliani-admits-he-gave-hunter-biden-story-to-ny-post-because-it-wouldnt-be-fact-checked/](https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/rudy-giuliani-admits-he-gave-hunter-biden-story-to-ny-post-because-it-wouldnt-be-fact-checked/) By the way, saying it is "disinformation" means the claims are false which is the same thing as denying them. [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/disinformation?s=t](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/disinformation?s=t)

1

Moon_over_homewood 3 hs ago

So under your theory of publishing, the Steele dossier should have never been published by buzzfeed? Because the claims in the dossier were either hearsay, or proven false. Seemingly nobody fact checked the document that lead to absolutely zero convictions for Russia or 2016 election related crimes.

1

Yukon-C-14 3 hs ago

Sounds like you don’t understand what the Steele dossier was. The dossier was a starting point for investigations, not the investigations themselves. It’s raw intel. The whole point of it was for investigators to verify the intel.

1

wmzer0mw :ivoted: I voted 3 hs ago

This guy gets it! Its really annoying to explain this. Steele was meant for US intelligence to act on. I.E "I worked in Intelligence, These things stood out to me, can you take a look". It was never the end all be all of intelligence. Just one piece of the puzzle.

1

Yukon-C-14 3 hs ago

I think the easiest way to explain is to just state that it’s raw intel that requires verification.

1

benaruru 4 hs ago

Politico is misinformation.

3

RaygunP 4 hs ago

But her emails...

1

AutoModerator 4 hs ago

Register to vote or check your registration status here. Plan your vote: Early voting | Mail in voting.

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

wewter 4 hs ago

Other than ex-Intel officials' speculations, where's the proof?

1

zakmosis 4 hs ago

My favorite part of the article is this:

“While the letter’s signatories presented no new evidence, they said their national security experience had made them “deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case” and cited several elements of the story that suggested the Kremlin’s hand at work.”

No evidence? Suggestions from a handful of ex spooks in the midst of alleged deep state shenanigans? I’m convinced

5

GimletOnTheRocks 4 hs ago

Yep. Don't believe the emails, believe our evid... er, I mean we haven't seen any evidence at all to this effect, but believe us when we say it: > “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” One wonders if the emails are fake, why they simply don't say that. Notice the weasel words where they won't come out and say it's fake (which is what actually matters) instead opting to say it seems like Russian interference. It's almost like they know the emails are real, but want us to believe we should ignore it because... Russia. Or something.

2

zakmosis 4 hs ago

EXACTLY it hardly matters how the emails were obtained if the contents are factual. Hell, even if Russian agents stole the laptop that would be WAY better than the would-be president in bed with China as the emails supposedly suggest which is a real existential risk compared to Russia.

2

veganmark 4 hs ago

Lies and paranoid confabulations in the service of the US military empire and MIC are their stock in trade.

By the way, Ray McGovern is a "former senior intelligence official" - how about asking him?

5

ichankal 4 hs ago

I'm just posting so I can come back later and see how quick this story of Russian disinfo about Ukrainian links gets deleted by the modds as "US internal news/US politics"... like every other time a Biden story gets posted here.

Remember kiddies, this subreddt isnt politically neutral and you arent being neutrally informed of world news. Trump stories stay, while Biden stories get deleted.

Edit - and its gone.

Lasted about 1 hour before the modds took it down, as expected, under the excuse of "US internal news/US politics".

1

Biptoslipdi 3 hs ago

Apparently the following paragraphs are about Trump and internal American news. >DAKAR, Senegal – On Aug. 5, militants carrying the black flag of the Islamic State launched a daring land-and-sea assault on the strategic port city of Mocimboa da Praia in northern Mozambique. In less than a week, they routed government forces and captured the entire town, declaring it the capital of a new Islamic province. >Days later, a different band of Islamist gunmen rampaged through a famous wildlife park for giraffes in Koure, Niger, just 35 miles from the country’s capital. Firing from motorbikes, they killed eight people, including six French humanitarian workers. >The two attacks on opposite sides of Africa are among the scores of violent episodes to shake the continent in what experts are calling a breakout year for extremist groups affiliated with al-Qaida or the Islamic State. Less than two years after the fall of the Islamic State’s self-declared caliphate in Syria and Iraq, the terrorist group is attempting a comeback in Africa, with far-reaching implications for a region already beset by poverty, corruption and the novel coronavirus.

1

ichankal 3 hs ago

No, its a feature story. Feature stories, no matter who or what they are about, are specifically banned under rule 5.

0

Biptoslipdi 3 hs ago

Featured stories are allowed when the original source is paywalled because paywalls are banned. But you said it was allowed to stay because it was a Trump story. It isn't a Trump story.

1

ichankal 3 hs ago

> It isn't a Trump story. Its got "Trump" in the fucking headline! It quotes Trump in the headline! It refers to him TEN TIMES in the article!

0

Biptoslipdi 2 hs ago

So if Trump is mentioned at all in a story, that story is a Trump story? Africa is mentioned 20 times. By this logic, isn't it an Africa story?

1

ichankal 2 hs ago

It would indeed be, and if you had told me "*It isn't an Africa story*" then I would be equally disinclined to agree.

0

Biptoslipdi 2 hs ago

So you agree the article belongs in this sub because it is an Africa story and not internal US news? An Africa story cannot be US internal news.

1

ichankal 31 mins ago

>and not internal US news? I know its been more than an hour or so, and its possible you've forgotten the issue that makes the story worth banning... > No, its a feature story. > > > > Feature stories, no matter who or what they are about, are specifically banned under rule 5.

1

Biptoslipdi 21 mins ago

It's not a feature story. I think you asserted that without ever reading the rules for this sub or knowing what a "feature story" is. [Here](https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-feature-story-2074335) is the description of a "feature story" in r/worldnews according to the [sub wiki.](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/wiki/rules) A feature lede doesn't have to have the who, what, where, when and why in the very first paragraph, the way a hard-news lede does. >DAKAR, Senegal – On Aug. 5, militants carrying the black flag of the Islamic State launched a daring land-and-sea assault on the strategic port city of Mocimboa da Praia in northern Mozambique. In less than a week, they routed government forces and captured the entire town, declaring it the capital of a new Islamic province. Who? "militants carrying the black flag of the Islamic State" What? "launched a daring land-and-sea assault" Where? "Mocimboa da Praia in northern Mozambique." When? "On Aug. 5" Why? "the strategic port city" >Feature stories often employ a more leisurely pace than news stories. Features take the time to tell a story, instead of rushing through it the way news stories often seem to do. No embellishment or anecdotes. Just quotes and facts. >Taking more time to tell a story means using more space, which is why features are usually, though not always, longer than hard news articles. Pretty short article. Certainly not an excessive length with a lot of fluff. >If news stories tend to focus on events, then features tend to focus more on people. No human element. >Feature articles also include more of the elements that are used in traditional storytelling Zero storytelling or narration. The article provides an example of a "feature story" as one about a guy who plays violin on the subway. A "feature story" is a puff piece, not a report about war developments and their political ramifications. The article you call a feature story meets none of the elements of a feature story and clearly violates some of those elements. The article doesn't violate any sub posting rules. You asserted it did baselessly to form a meager argument about bias, revealing your own bias in turn.

1

squaremild 4 hs ago

What was Iran like before the American/British coup?

0

squaremild 4 hs ago

The U.S. Needs to Face Up to Its Long History of Election Meddling

0

XenophiliusLovegood6 4 hs ago

What are you trying to prove? That election interference is bad? Anyone with a basic concept of US history knows the US is guilty of it.

1

squaremild 4 hs ago

russian INFORMATION is not russian DISINFORMATION

1

32Ash 5 hs ago

"We cannot let misinformation campaigns interfere", says the shill running a misinformation campaign.

The only misinformation campaign is the people trying to hide the truth and want you to not read the obvious corruption of Biden.

4

Geronimosstolenbones 5 hs ago

Replace "Our" to "Their" and it is Correct.

0

Interwebnets 5 hs ago

"Dozens of Biden supporters support Biden"

Lol

1

Lou__Vegas 5 hs ago

Why cite a source if it's politically bias? Why are the organizations claiming disinformation the biggest carriers of disinformation? Why has "fact checking" become a source of lies? Why are Twitter and Facebook outsourcing their censoring to political organizations?

2

BeigeListed 4 hs ago

🎵 Why do birds, suddenly appear, Just because you are near? 🎵

0

No_Jok_Oh 5 hs ago

Thats what they hope they want you to believe. To many coincidences. To be false. besides. Guess who's leading the bullshit. Pencil neck schiff.

0

Biptoslipdi 5 hs ago

You guys will believe anything published in tabloids.

5

No_Jok_Oh 4 hs ago

Nothin but facts. Open your eyes!!!

0

Biptoslipdi 4 hs ago

Learn what a fact is before you use the term.

2

No_Jok_Oh 4 hs ago

Sure. Mr dictionary. When you learn the real truth.

0

Biptoslipdi 4 hs ago

So I have to exclusively read grocery store tabloids to find the "real truth?" I guess HRC really did adopt an alien baby.

2

No_Jok_Oh 4 hs ago

I guess you need to humor yourself dreaming up excuses for a worthless dum dum dem. Guess thats what your good at. Believing in tabloids.

1

Biptoslipdi 4 hs ago

You understand you are defending an article published in a tabloid as a "fact?"

2

SethRogensPubes 5 hs ago

Too many coincidences to be false? Are you talking about how the emails were obtained?

4

2

4

2

1 3

2

13 5

CryptoMods Bronze 6 hs ago

Hello, your post was removed because your account is less than 50 days old or you do not have the required 500 comment karma to make post submissions.

1

KX9lol 6 hs ago

Does Bitcoin have decentralized mixing, or are these just centralized services? Bitcoin is a pretty terrible coin to use for privacy reasons.

I know Zcoin protocol implements decentralized mixing and other privacy coins copy the idea. There is also XMR which is becoming the de facto privacy coin.

No clue how the government will even attempt to regulate the real privacy coins.

0

AutoModerator 6 hs ago

Bitcoin(BTC) Basic Info: Website - r/Bitcoin - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

KarstaaMauka Yesterday

First? Didn't Ross get 20 years added to his sentence for running a bitcoin mixer?

0

SugarAdamAli Yesterday

Can someone explain what a bitcoin mixer is?

1

chipfox 11 hs ago

First you deposit your butts into a dodgy website, even by buttcoin standards, then you receive less butts that can be directly tracked back to a dark net pedo ring. And that's it, clean butts.

1

cactusgenie Yesterday

This is big! Can't wait to see the ripple effects of this rock Bitcoin to it's core!!

7

SamsungGalaxyPlayer XMR Contributor Yesterday

Relevant Hacker News thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24829158

Essential reading on why Monero devs are not conducting money transmission by releasing software: https://www.fincen.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/FinCEN%20Guidance%20CVC%20FINAL%20508.pdf

11

SPAWNBUG Yesterday

What are the implications for Wasabi and samouri?

5

john_r365 Yesterday

And to zero in on a specific section from the Fincen document, see Section 4.5.1(b) Quote: “An anonymizing software provider is not a money transmitter. FinCEN regulations exempt from the definition of money transmitter those persons providing “the delivery, communication, or network access services used by a money transmitter to support money transmission services.” This is because suppliers of tools (communications, hardware, or software) that may be utilized in money transmission, like anonymizing software, are engaged in trade and not money transmission. By contrast, a person that utilizes the software to anonymize the person’s own transactions will be either a user or a money transmitter, depending on the purpose of each transaction. For example, a user would employ the software when paying for goods or services on its own behalf, while a money transmitter would use it to engage as a business in the acceptance and transmission of value as a transmittor’s or intermediary’s financial institution.”

5

jonas_h Author of 'Why cryptocurrencies' Yesterday

Decentralized mixing schemes or on-chain obfuscation aren't included in the money transmitter laws so Monero isn't affected.

16

happyscrappy IT Specialist Yesterday

Who could have thought that a service explicitly not designed for money laundering but completely perfect for it because it is designed to hide the origins of funds would end up being against anti-money laundering laws?

9

AutoModerator Yesterday

Welcome to r/patient_hackernews! Remember that in this subreddit, commenting requires a special process:

Declare your intention of commenting by posting a pre-comment containing only the single letter R. (This pre-comment will not be visible to others.)
Wait 24 hours or more (you will receive a reminder).
You can then post a new comment with your actual reply in the same location.

Comments that don't abide by the 24h delay will be automatically removed.

NOTE: since step 3 is not mandatory, pre-comments can also be left as a way to set up a reminder to check up on the discussion in 24h.

More information on how this forum works.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

qznc_bot2 Yesterday

There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.

1

propter_hoc Yesterday

This is a $60 million civil penalty and finding of fact from FinCEN, the money laundering & terrorist financing authority. Harmon appears to still be facing up to 17.5 years of prison on federal criminal charges as well.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2020/02/13/bitcoin-larry-dean-harmon-indicted-cryptocurrency-money-laundering-scheme/4746978002/

5

SnapshillBot Yesterday

Ooh lala, good job on bashing Bitcoin. How to disrespect a great innovation.

Snapshots:

First Bitcoin “Mixer” Penalized by ... - archive.org, archive.today*

I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers

4

17 3

PanneKopp 5 hs ago

sorry, I still do not get why I should ty up some funds in LN just to receive a payment - this is completely the opposite of what Bitcoin was meant to be

1

VillaCaruso New Redditor 7 hs ago

LN is bank 3.0, stop shilling this crap pls.

1

Danny1878 11 hs ago

Would this work for merchants too who want to accept lightning payments? If channels are just opened up on the fly as required, it should work right? Or is there a limit on the amount of channels etc?

1

king-only 11 hs ago

It works in POS mode as well...

2

Leithm 12 hs ago

There is nothing wrong with lightning in principle. There is plenty wrong with a 1mb block size cap.

I think there is about 1,000 times as much crypto locked into the defi network if I am not mistaken?

2

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 9 hs ago

> There is nothing wrong with lightning in principle. um what? - Can't send money to someone who's offline like Bitcoin can. That's a regression in features. - Isn't backed by Bitcoin's record hashrate. That's why they're working on 3rd party watchtower services to watch over your money. So you're sacrificing security for low fees. - Has send limits based on your peers send capacity. /u/N0tMyRealAcct just found out the service he's shilling is capped to $450 - Merchants need to continously topoff their side of the channel... just to be able to keep receiving payments. Does that sound how you use money today? If not it's a regression. the list goes on. Lightning is literally a regression to Bitcoin's feature in every way AND you sacrifice onchain security for low fees. What a joke.

6

N0tMyRealAcct 9 hs ago

u/leithm, beware of this user. He is intentionally trolling I believe and ruining any productive discussions in here with aggressive statements. Not interested in discussions at all. Only suppressing.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 9 hs ago

no one falls for your lies. Here's /u/N0tMyRealAcct getting caught lying twice in the same claim then dropping the conversation when caught lying: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/ Did anyone in this thread fall for your lies?

2

N0tMyRealAcct 9 hs ago

I dropped the discussion because you are nasty and are intentionally trying to misunderstand. Note to others, I’m willing to continue the discussion with you in the thread he linked to. I’m just avoiding this guy from now on.

2

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 9 hs ago

> I dropped the discussion because you are nasty and are intentionally trying to misunderstand. that's a lie: /u/N0tMyRealAcct summary of lies so far: - Bitcoin average blocksize is 1.2MB NOT 2.1MB - Channel factories might save anywhere between 55% - 90% in blocksize, NOT your claimed 96%. And to get a 90% channel savings you'd literally need to open hundreds of LN channels at once, which is NOT what the typical LN user does.

1

OverlordQ 14 hs ago

When Bob wants to receive a payment but lacks inbound capacity, his Breez app recognizes the lack and issues two invoices using the same preimage: one to Alice requesting payment and a second to the Breez LSP.

Instead of limiting a single channel to 1M sats, Breez now limits the sum of all a user’s local balances to 4M sats.

So a whole lot of complexity and involving middlemen to only be able to send $450.

And you're trying to sell this as a good thing?

10

N0tMyRealAcct 11 hs ago

> So a whole lot of complexity and involving middlemen to only be able to send $450. That is an arbitrary constant. But even if it wasn’t, Lightning allows for a lot of new use cases. There are trade offs but there are many more possibilities. Lightning is intended for you to buy chewing gum. It works well for that.

1

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 10 hs ago

wow $450 send limit. Why would anyone want to use LN when it's not even backed by Bitcoin's record hashrate AND be capped to such joke limits.

2

N0tMyRealAcct 9 hs ago

If you want a bigger transaction the wallet can fall back onto an on-chain transaction. No issues here. It is backed by Bitcoins hash rate. As a protocol the Lightning protocol is cryptographically as strong as Bitcoin. Much unlike 0-conf which isn’t backed by hash rate at all. But that is as far as I will let you troll me away from the topic at hand.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 9 hs ago

> If you want a bigger transaction the wallet can fall back onto an on-chain transaction. No issues here. And pay high fees again? why? > As a protocol the Lightning protocol is cryptographically as strong as Bitcoin. Yeah that's why in Bitcoin you don't check in on your money because hashrate secures it, while in Lightning you do check in on your money because no hashrate secures it. Care to tell me why watchtowers are a thing if hashrate secures it? just yesterday /u/N0tMyRealAcct was caught pushing lies and twisting numbers and dropped the conversation after 2 lies: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/

6

N0tMyRealAcct 9 hs ago

Beware all, this user is I believe intentionally trying to poison any productive discussions.

0

3andahalfacres Redditor for less than 30 days 9 hs ago

You got caught pushing lies yesterday. You claimed blocks are 2.1MB when they're actually 1.2Mb and claim in the future schnorr and channel factories will produce 96% saving, when it's closer to 50% rofl https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/jbh8yf/bitcoin_cash_as_the_world_currency_what_it_takes/g9cwkac/ your own words /u/N0tMyRealAcct

3

alturigo Yesterday

“Inbound liquidity remains an issue, but it is now an issue for engineers and developers to worry about, not users.”

These guys get it.

3

Danny1878 Yesterday

Amazing stuff.

2

hungdoge Yesterday

How do I download this and play with it? Can't find it

1

king-only Yesterday

Android: https://play.google.com/apps/testing/com.breez.client iOS: https://testflight.apple.com/join/wPju2Du7

1

bitusher Yesterday

Excellent.

This is what it is like using breez all day long -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOmUpp3J9Ck

2

almkglor Yesterday

Zero-reserve makes theft attempts costless. It is fine if Breez server is demanding 0 reserve but the client is allowed to demand non-zero reserve, but if Breez does require the client to demand 0 reserve, it allows Breez to steal funds.

Though as noted in their zero-conf channels, Breez is already in a position to potentially steal funds from users when the user receives via a zero-conf channel that has not deeply confirmed yet. This is fine if e.g. the user is buying Bitcoins using a fiat ramp with Breez directly (the fiat part is always tr*st-requiring anyway), but not so much for general payments. Though as noted as well this is time-bound, once the channel is deeply confirmed it won't matter. Zero-reserve is more concerning, unless Breez allows clients to demand non-zero reserve while demanding zero-reserve itself.

1

king-only Yesterday

Breez has 1% channel reserve, the risk is entirely on the Breez end.

1

almkglor Yesterday

Okay, thanks for clarifying, the article does not inform this.

1

king-only Yesterday

np. You were right to comment. Since we already reduced the channel reserve (only on the client end) to a near-dust value before this update, I didn't see a need to explain it, but maybe I should add it.

1

almkglor Yesterday

Yes. To those who stumble on this thread: note that removing the reserve on the client side only makes theft attempts *costless*, but not necessarily *successful*. Breez presumably can afford to run their nodes 24/7 with near 100% uptime and presumably has some kind of watchtower setup, so even if clients could theoretically drain their channel to 0 and then attempt to rewind time to when their channel had more at no risk to themselves, they would still not succeed in practice often enough to hurt Breez. So this is an acceptable policy for Breez to follow, assuming they have good redundancy and so on.

2

infernalr00t Yesterday

Right now LN wallets are doing all the boring work so we can move stuff in a few years.

Congrats.

5

3andahalfacres Yesterday

Can I send money to someone who's offline like Bitcoin Cash can?

Am I capped to certain send limits or uncapped like Bitcoin Cash?

Is Lightning backed by Bitcoin's hashrate or must I periodically sign in to prevent theft or eventually hire a 3rd party watchtower service?

5

fresheneesz Yesterday

I love Breez. Such an easy app. The main thing I want it to do tho is run an android service that listens for attempted direct payments so I can pay someone directly without requiring them to take out their phone. Then it would truly be a replacement for venmo.

I have a couple questions:

A. What fees does Breez pay to open channels for its users? Like, how is it calculated and what are the average costs it takes on?

B. Why not splice in new balance into the same channel rather than creating new channels? Wouldn't that reduce channel complexity as well as giving more optimal avenues for adding funds to a channel?

1

king-only Yesterday

Thank you! We have the Lightning Rod to implement for offline payments: https://medium.com/breez-technology/introducing-lightning-rod-2e0a40d3e44a Splicing isn't yet implemented. There are advantages to working with multiple channels like not being dependent on a specific peer. We are going to add 3rd party LSPs into Breez, so multi channel is important. Now that we have MPP, it's much less complicated to manage.

3

fresheneesz Yesterday

> Lightning Rod I see that article is from a year ago. However I couldn't find any way to pay someone while their app wasn't open in March or April. When was that incorporated into the app? How do I use it? > We are going to add 3rd party LSPs into Breez, so multi channel is important. > not being dependent on a specific peer ... add 3rd party LSPs into Breez Gotcha, very cool!

1

king-only Yesterday

We didn't yet implement it... Soon I hope...

3

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon Yesterday

after having routed hundreds of thousands of transactions over thousands of channels

that gives a hint at how many transactions are happening in the whole LN space - ALOT! and nothing is recorded, nothing has to touch the mainchain and we all get solid privacy.

6

zv099 redditor for 3 weeks Yesterday

When do you think we Breez will be out of beta mode and we can just download it from the app store?

2

king-only Yesterday

Let's see how the RC goes... EOY hopefully...

3

zv099 redditor for 3 weeks Yesterday

Jesus, this really is amazing! I was a Lightning skeptic in the past but this is a LOT of work and is exactly what's needed to make it work seamlessly.

Anyone still doubting Lightning in good faith should look at all the work like this. Most people won't so it's an uphill battle for a while but it's clearly working and will win out.

LSP...does that stand for lightning service provider?

12

king-only Yesterday

Thank you ❤️ And yes: https://medium.com/breez-technology/introducing-lightning-service-providers-fe9fb1665d5f

4

Immediate-Host Yesterday

this is what we need to get lightning mainstream, awesome work and article, I liked it a lot.

!lntip 5000

14

king-only Yesterday

Thank you ❤️

4

lntipbot Yesterday

Hi u/Immediate-Host, thanks for tipping u/king-only **5000** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

1

2

2 14 3

trynewideas - @trynewideas 2 days ago

> Another example is business productivity apps architected as web services. Early products like Salesforce were easier to access and cheaper to maintain than their on-premise counterparts. Modern productivity apps like Google Docs, Figma, and Slack focus on things you simply couldn’t do before, like real-time collaboration and deep integrations with other apps.

I'm not sure I'd consider any of these brand new things, even in the context of cloud nativity. CSCW works in particular go back to the mid-80s! They aren't new things, but iterations on old things -- the iterative gap is so large that they _feel_ new, but the changes they provided improved accessibility to existing functionality, not innovative new functionality.

- Networked CRMs were preceded by so, so many database frontends.

- Google Docs was bought-not-made, and its components were also preceded by peer-to-peer collaborative editing tools outside of the web browser (SubEthaEdit, but also Instant Update, Aspects, and other early 90s/00s groupware suites).

- Collaborative drawing and design software go all the way back to Xerox PARC projects like Videodraw.

- Slack wasn't even first of its breed!

GCA10 - @GCA10 2 days ago

Presumably DOTB and DBNT should be pitched to investors -- and funded -- in very different ways.

Doing old things better is very amenable to metrics, lifetime value of customer, market-adoption forecasts, cost of customer acquisition, etc. This is the land of venture money with milestones and ever-growing rounds as success unfolds. (Or asphyxiation if success doesn't happen.)

Doing brand new things probably is far more likely to start via bootstrapping, passion projects, university research and other areas where open-ended curious inquiry is tolerated better. Dixon (OP) loosely acknowledges this when he writes that entrepreneurs "usually spend many years deeply immersed in the underlying technology before they have their key insights."

Eventually the path forward will be clear enough that the VC/metrics folks can show up for later financing rounds and do their thing. But I'll argue that venture's metrics-driven feed-or-starve system is more likely to mess up this early exploration than to help it.

Even though VCs will insist that they are equally good at both.

rossdavidh - @rossdavidh 2 days ago

"The most common mistake people make when evaluating new technologies is to focus too much on the “doing old things better” category."

While I get what they're driving at, I think there are good reasons to focus on this; you have some plausible chance of getting it right. The track record of people, even really smart people who work in technology, being able to predict the 'brand new things' that technology will be used for, is awful. Plus, if you want to get the technology up and running, it needs to get used for something old (better) first. If the early moviemakers hadn't made play-like movies first, they might never have learned enough about film to make movies that weren't like that.

Just because the early uses of a technology are doing old things better, but the later brand new things turn out to be a bigger deal, doesn't mean the 'old things better' phase was a mistake. It is probably necessary.

shahbaby - @shahbaby 2 days ago

I used to wonder why there's always a constant flood of new new technologies, frameworks, products, etc. instead of improvements over existing solutions.

Now I believe I know why; it's about growth for the business, at all levels. New technology may give the business a competitive edge but more importantly it will give the developers who created it as well as those who learn it, a career boast.

This is why we get things like software updates for a UI that no one asked for.

In the end, the core idea is that "good enough" is never enough. Because improvements, not maintenance, drive careers forward.

altacc - @altacc 2 days ago

Also known as sustaining innovation vs disruptive innovation.

When you’re embedded in a technology or business it’s harder to come up with something totally new, your perspective is often limited by your situation (everything is a nail when you have a hammer). As something brand new can also be damaging to the current business model, it feels uncomfortable.

Often you need somebody with the right mix of experience and independence (plus enough capital) to create something truly disruptive.

megameter - @megameter 1 day ago

You can market your end results as an old thing, but if it's ever the case that you aren't introducing a thing new to that market, you have a speculative hot potato, not a good business. If the neighborhood already has five boba shops, the sixth one that opens is facing a lot of competition.

Which in some respects doesn't mean you have to be innovative at any point, just well timed and positioned. Underserved niches often love "more of the old stuff" if it brings back something they thought was lost. And bringing back the old stuff can be a gamble just as much as doing a groundbreaking thing; in that case, having a way of doing it better is a great derisk.

ksec - @ksec 1 day ago

How do we define new things though?

Search Engine, Smartphone, Digital Cameras, PCs what else? All of the leader in those categories were Doing Old Things Better.

It wasn't about Doing Old or New. It was simply about the timing and Roadmap. Apple Newton had all the right idea, but the technology was far from ready and 15 years ahead of its time.

Netflix? Remember there was a War between Windows Media, MPEG and RealVideo before the days of Flash Video Streaming?

To me, doing new things is Invention. Doing old things better is innovation. At the end of the day, all it matter if there is enough Value creation, it seems to me DOTB or DBNT is the wrong question to ask.

aabhay - @aabhay 2 days ago

What are some examples in the DBNT category that created unicorn startups? I know lots of DBNT that happened inside of large companies (e.g. Bell Labs). What are some examples of cases where the companies were able to create massive market share from scratch?

Common examples of DBNT were really just DOTB:

Google -> not the first search engine

Apple -> not the first computer/music player/touch phone

Spotify -> not the first music streaming platform

Nvidia -> not the first GPU

maverickJ - @maverickJ 2 days ago

Sometimes you just have to copy what worked for someone else in their venture and apply it to your own venture. I know that the world tells us that we need to be original; that we need to come up with new ideas to apply to our lives, careers and businesses; that we are special. However, I believe that sometimes, we can achieve tremendous success not by trying to come up with new ideas but by leveraging ideas that have already been tested by someone else.

The article https://leveragethoughts.substack.com/p/originality-is-not-t... provides a case study.

rvr_ - @rvr_ 1 day ago

I don't believe in 100% original work. Everything is build upon the past. Doing new things will always be some form of doing old things better.

ryanSrich - @ryanSrich 2 days ago

Find products with low NPS and high fragmentation. No need for an entirely novel idea. Even the best products we use everyday were very likely not brand new ideas.

colordrops - @colordrops 1 day ago

Then there's doing old things better by doing brand new things, e.g. tesla and SpaceX.

innagadadavida - @innagadadavida 1 day ago

This all depends on where you draw the lines.

One could argue that nothing really new has happened since digital audio, video, computing and communication - all technologies that are 50years old.

All that has happened is that they got cheaper, faster, smaller. Most certainly, a16z has invested mostly in startups that just fall into this category and very little in building fundamental tech.

mrmonkeyman - @mrmonkeyman 1 day ago

If you think Salesforce is just same old, but online, you don't know Salesforce.

Google docs, Figma and especially Slack rehash old ideas. Hardly any new ideas there. Wrong examples.

Show all comments on Hackernews

25 4

IGRIVKO 2 days ago

https://youtu.be/wZr_KRwZfhY и видео с акценти от нейното изявление, с леки препратки към крипто валутите и #bitcoin от автора на материала.

1

FuzzyApartment 2 days ago

Beginning of the end of the USD as the world reserve currency is what came to mind when I read this nonsense.

1

spe59436-bcaoo 3 days ago

Original Bretton Woods moment: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com. Absolute scum

1

SatoshisVisionTM Yesterday

That was nixon's decision to take the dollar off of the gold standard. Bretton woods was in the forties post-ww2, and tethered the USD to most other currencies.

1

neo_mkl 3 days ago

The IMF is the bitch to the Bank of International Settlements in Basel.

1

structee 3 days ago

Can someone explain what this will mean? I always understood Bretton woods was a huge deal.

2

fremeer 2 days ago

Bretton woods was basically everyone in developed world deciding to go on a gold standard. It last officially something like 25 years. But realistically it lasted much less because banks had started to circumvent it in the 60s. The reason it was important was because they didn't use one countries currency as the reserve. One issue with a reserve currency is that when it becomes the dominant form of credit currency because of trade you end up needing that country to provide liquidity assistance to the whole world. I'm not sure how it would work because a lot of the current issue is the central banks as a whole are run by neoclassical people. They dont really model for credit and that's the dominant form of monetary creation.

4

Internetguy9998 2 days ago

Are you being serious right now? Dude, seriously... Bernankes work was literally based on credit markets and their impact of financial crisis, this was why he extended credit to other central banks too.

1

fremeer 2 days ago

The dsge modelling commonly used by banks doesn't involve credit as an input. Hell the idea of indebted demand etc in a neoclassical model is something that only started to be talked post financial crisis. Bernanke never really worried about the accumulation of private debt at all. He worried about seizing up of credit markets.

1

lolomfgkthxbai 2 days ago

> The reason it was important was because they didn’t use one countries currency as the reserve. In practice it was a way to make the US dollar the reserve currency with an extra step since the US held most of the gold in the world.

3

johnturtle 3 days ago

This is good for bitcoin (tm)

During Brenton Woods, the dollar was pegged to gold, isn't this a good sign for bitcoin? This could lead to governments buying bitcoin and pegging their currency to bitcoin.

1

TheGreatMuffin 3 days ago

> During Brenton Woods, the dollar was pegged to gold I am not an expert at all, but I'm pretty sure the peg of USD to gold was far before that. Bretton Woods pegged other countries' currencies to USD though, from what I understand, as a way to ensure USD's status as a world reserve currency.

1

SatoshisVisionTM Yesterday

Correct. And when Nixon in 1971 decided to move the dollar away from the fixed peg with gold, he basically shanked the entire world.

1

BigRocksFirst redditor for 5 weeks 3 days ago

There were gold standards before Bretton Woods. The US (and others) had gone off it. I can't remember if US was back on it before Bretton Woods, but I'm thinking no - the cost of the war was likely too high. As such, I'm thinking Bretton Woods was an attempt to get main world economies back on gold standard, but there was a problem. There wasn't enough gold for all countries to be on the gold standard, but there was enough gold for USD to be backed by gold. So, USD was backed by gold and all other nations in the agreement pegged their currency to USD. That allowed all countries to be "pegged to gold", even if indirectly. That fell apart when USD could also not be backed by gold anymore.

1

maxcoiner 3 days ago

Too early for that. Not until all governments already have stockpiles of Bitcoin (And the price would easily be above $10m per BTC then) would they ever consider it. Otherwise the limits on the money supply are way too constrictive. Gold's supply is too constrictive too for that matter. There's only $12 trillion or so worth of Gold in existence. There really isn't anything to back all of today's debt and currencies with.

1

Rusure111111 Bronze 3 days ago

nothing like a little fear mongering by the media to force 100mm new people into poverty, debt, and decreased value of their savings and only let them out when they agree to a new financial system based on carbon credits, continued expansion of fed balance sheets, and more debt.

These people definitely care about you.

1

quigleydude redditor for 2 weeks 3 days ago

I just finished watching a video by Simon Dixon on the subject. Give it a look.

1

ComedyTragedy01 3 days ago

Should make a tldr

0

Logical_Espresso redditor for 3 months 3 days ago

Someone call Ethan Hunt

1

stablecoin-org 3 days ago

I am encouraged by G20 discussions on a Common framework for Sovereign Debt Resolution as well as on our call for improving the architecture for sovereign debt resolution, including private sector participation.

Can someone translate this ?

6

EnricoDandoloThaDOV 2 days ago

In looking at that paragraph in full, I suspect the author is referencing Europe's recent experience with rising debt-servicing costs as a result of a sudden increase in public sector deficits. Unlike the US Treasury or the BOJ, whose debt servicing burden doesn't really increase in line with its outstanding obligations, European governments are vulnerable to perceptions of their repayment ability when they run deficits for some extended period of time. Good examples of this are cases like Ireland, where the government attempted to assume the debts of its heavily indebted financial sector only to default on its own external obligations. Really since 2010 European governments have struggled with the interaction between having a multi-national banking system where governments create debts a la carte, and financial markets assessing their credit risk on a case by case basis. What's being said there is that not everyone can simply issue new debts to support economic activity and that its good to see some discussion on how to better handle resolving heavily indebted sovereigns who end up caught between rising debt servicing costs and lackluster economic performance that doesn't generate the revenues to allow for repayment or borrowing on more agreeable terms.

1

ontrack 2 days ago

Not completely knowledgeable about this, but didn't Draghi make the problem of sovereign debt go away permanently with his guarantee that the ECB will do whatever it takes to keep nations solvent? Italy is borrowing at essentially zero percent these days; the market no longer matters.

1

EnricoDandoloThaDOV 2 days ago

The ECB's broad commitment more pushed embattled sovereigns like Italy and Spain back from the precipice, but the overarching concerns about how those Governments (*and really anyone not France or Germany*) will handle their debt servicing problems has persisted into the present financial crises developing in the wake of COVID.

1

BigRocksFirst 3 days ago

I may be way off base, but here is my thinking... First, necessary background... The data looks to me like much of the world is near the end of the long-term debt cycle. It's not the first time, but it happens infrequently enough that you have to study history instead of relying on experience from your own lifetime. When the end of the long-term debt cycle arrives, the debt level (whether public debt - which means sovereign/govt debt, or whether private debt - which means debt held/owed by individuals, businesses and non-govt institutions) becomes literally unsustainable. There are only 2 known ways to deal with such unsustainable debt levels. Default on the debt, or high enough inflation that the debt can become affordable to pay back with cheaper inflated dollars. A combination of the 2 can also be used. There can also be partial defaults, commonly called "debt restructuring", where things happen such as partial forgiveness of debt, lowering the interest rate, lengthening payback terms, etc. Restructuring tends to happen when the alternative would be nothing gets payed back and there is no asset to foreclose to cover the loan, so the lender would otherwise lose everything they had lended. There is also some ability to transfer private debt to public debt (the fed buys corporate bonds, mortgaged-backed securities, etc - the govt forgives student loans, etc). Defaulting on the debt causes economic destruction, lowering net worth, and also making it even harder for anyone to pay off remaining debt as the economy collapses. Inflating it away causes inflation, loss of buying power for those with meaningful networth, but makes it easier for remaining debt to payed off. Done "wrong" it is a very hard landing. Done perfectly it is a comparably "softer" landing, but nothing near pain-free. Done perfectly, it minimizes the pain to the working class that doesn't have much net-worth to inflate away, and results in inflation that hopefully causes an increase in working class wages that roughly matches increases in prices. Now for the translation. The IMF is acknowledging that the situation discussed in the "background" section above is now the reality. The acknowledgement includes: the problem exists at the sovereign (govt debt) level, that "resolution" is unavoidable (that means accepting their will be defaults if nothing is done, so let's start discussing sovereign "debt restructuring" and debt defaults and coordinated money-printing early while we still have a bit of time to think it through rather than only being able to react), and it implicitly acknowledges that a coordinated effort from many developed countries (the G20) has a profoundly higher chance of delivering a "softer" landing than an uncoordinated approach. In addition, it acknowledges that it might provide more national and world stability if "private sector" can participate in any "debt resolution". 2nd level translation: it might be a more dangerous time to lend any money or take any loan, unless you know what you are doing. The issues with debt resolution won't appear tomorrow. It will take longer. But if I needed to get a loan right now (e.g.,.a mortgage), I would definitely want the govt to be the lender, so that the opportunity to "restructure" it would be higher if economic destruction happens. And, if I had govt backed student loans and other loans, and was making extra payments, I would direct the extra payments to the non-govt loans, where the opportunity for debt restructuring or debt-forgiveness is lower. I would be leary of making any unsecured loans (buying govt bonds), or any loans not 100% collateralized (corporate bonds). If making a loan, I would want the collateral to be MORE than sufficient (e.g., owner-financing on sale of house), in case asset values drop, which is what would likely be happening if I had to foreclose due to default on the loan due to a global end-of-debt cycle issue.

15

senjutsuka 1 day ago

Jubilee is back in style! No but seriously, this had better be acted out with laser precision or we're going to see a french revolution like reaction. There is already so much inequality and worse its completely laid bare. Add in all the various global efforts at dis and mis information and you have a recipe for serious social trust damage.

1

BigRocksFirst 1 day ago

Agreed that it's a real possibility, and agree with your view about how difficult the current situation is. The rise of "nationalist platforms" across multiple countries is one of the key "canaries in the mine", that the level of debt and level of inequality is at a level it won't be tolerated. Our society is now showing key signs of that danger point. Statistics show that a change to form of govt often happens. The end of the long term debt level produces the maximum inequality. Opposition gets polarized because the problem is real and there is a lot at stake for both the haves and have-nots. Both polarized sides refuse to compromise, no action is taken, the problem gets worse, then upheaval happens (someone claims emergency powers, etc, and democracy is lost - worse, some changed regimes then use war to try to obtain resources to get out of the economic problem). There is much more research available, and what I wrote is oversimplified, but the historical data is not encouraging. The fact that the IMF is trying to get significant global cooperation now, though, I hope reduces that type of disruption. It's why the reference to Bretton Woods is relevant. Instead of a "call to arms", she's making a similar "call to cooperation" that helped provide more global economic stability since WW2 than existed before it, that presumably reduced war since WW2. I get that the standard way to fix the problem without regime change is to fix the problem with the same type of thinking that created the problem, and thus continue the cycle anew, but I still think that's better than becoming an authoritarian country. History shows that authoritarian regime is worse than economic destruction (such as a depression) followed by inflation. The authoritarian regime doesn't stop the economic problems, but it adds the loss of freedom problems. Not making any predictions, just being honest about what history shows. A lot depends on what type of person gets elected into positions of leadership, and whether those leaders can cooperate with leaders in other nations and within their own nation to more "softly" crash the plane. I don't want the plane crashed directly into democracy.

1

funke75 2 days ago

Wonderful breakdown of the situation. I would only contend that I believe things are going to happen at a much quicker pace than many would think. I am very interesting in seeing what the announcement will be on Monday morning

3

thisispoopoopeepee 3 days ago

there is a third option; paying it off over a few decades or more.

0

BigRocksFirst 2 days ago

Although that is an option for a single debt in general, once the amount of debt becomes unsustainable, that option won't work. If only the payback period is extended without a partial default on the principal or an implicit partial default by lowering the interest rate, then extending the payback period only works if the borrower has enough income to still actually afford the interest payment plus some reduced piece of the principal each payment (reduced because the payback term was extended). Once the total (even reduced) payment by itself exceeds the total ability to pay out of current cash flow, the situation reduces to just the other 2 situations. At a macro level, if my understanding of the current analysis is correct, the US will be at that point of no return no later than 2023, if not there already. And, the issue is not limited to the US. From my memory, the statistics are that only 1 time out of 50 has the above 2 options not happened once a nation's debt reached a certain "unsustainable" level, and we are already at that unsustainable level or forecasted to be there within 2 years tops. We were headed there without covid, but covid accelerated it. So, based on the past (and based on my memory to have not mixed up pieces of research), there is a 98% chance that we are facing those other 2 outcomes, and the IMF is acknowledging it is a global problem.

6

Not-your-dog303 2 days ago

Correct me if Im wrong, is this not the reason the gold bugs and the bitcoiners want to "Store value" in something that is not a national currency? I mean you could technically buy art or fine wine over sticking with currencies, that need to unwind a bunch of debt Most wealth in the west is stored in housing and stocks, so if the actual currencies lose value through inflationary measures AND you have no bank wanting to lend on homes that could decline in value during this period, you've got a real pickle there.

1

BigRocksFirst 2 days ago

I believe you are correct. That does seem to be the significant driver for current accumulation of gold and bitcoin. Gold as a "proven" store of value, and bitcoin as an "aspirational" store of value. From what I can gather, the unwinding of long term debt cycles has tended to have economic destruction first, then inflation second. My interpretation is that the Fed is committed to do whatever it takes to avoid the economic destruction phase this time through its monetary policy, but has basically said recently that it cannot achieve that goal without the government implementing coordinated fiscal policy. Nor is it clear that coordinated monetary and fiscal policy will actually be achieved (there are substantial "political will"/divisiveness issues in this country right now - the end of the long term debt cycle is also correlated to changes in form of govt (e.g., democracy becomes authoritarian) when the conflicting parties can't cooperate to solve a problem that by definition will have many losers - that's how several 1930s authoritarian leaders came to power - there is traditionally more political divisiveness near the end of the long term debt cycle). If cooperation IS achieved, it is not clear that the GOAL of that cooperation would actually be achieved. Because current monetary policy has already driven interest rates to basically zero and will stay there for quite a while, the entire 60/40 portfolio idea is out of the window for quite a while. People are all individually trying to figure out what to do in the face of possibly negative real rate of return for the next decade on interest bearing instruments - interest rate received actually below inflation. Because of that (the There Is No Alternative scenario), equities are currently already over inflating significantly to 2023/2025 levels, because there's not a good alternative place to put the money that people currently have. Real estate will presumably go up during the inflationary period if it happens. Presumably both real estate and most equities will go down during an economic destruction period, especially some rental real estate, and especially commercial real estate. Some equities would do well. The issue with lending is even worse than you mention. Banks don't want to lend on property that might go down in value (unless they believe the govt will bail them out), but as of this week, banks are tightening lending due to the risk of the borrower (rather than the risk of the securing asset). During an economic downturn, lots of people lose the ability to pay back loans. Yes, it is already a real pickle for anyone taking a forward looking view at portfolio asset allocation. More and more people are looking at alternative assets. Most people have neither the capital nor knowledge for fine art or wine investing. And those would do well in the inflationary period but my assumption is they would lose tremendous value during economic destruction period. Good luck and wisdom to everyone trying to navigate the next several years financially. I'm not claiming the sky is falling, just elaborating on all the backdrop of why someone at the IMF would be "encouraged" about 20 globally leading economies talking about "sovereign debt resolution, with opportunity for private participation." They are encouraged because they recognize the problem will not go away. The best they can do is have some influence on a controlled crash landing. Like you see in the movies when the landing gear won't come down from the airplane with 300 passengers on board. The plane is not going to survive the landing, but you try to save as many lives as possible.

6

BigRocksFirst 2 days ago

P.S. I am definitely NOT claiming to have it figured out. It is just something that I have been doing a deep dive on because it is clear to me that it is unsafe for me to presume previous asset allocations or sources of income would still be safe going forward. I am voraciously trying to figure out good decisions for myself in light of what appears to be the emerging macroeconomic situation. The best thinking out there seems to be that the closest corollary to our current situation is the US in the early/mid 1940s, on the heals of the 1930s. There seem to now be very thoughtful people sharing that perspective rather than it just being "sky is falling" folks like it was for the previous 30 years. Rather than feeling helpless, I decided I could deepen my education and try to reach better decisions based on that deeper education. Any thoughts I shared in this thread should be seen as a reflection of my current incomplete journey in getting that education. That's led me through a lot of history including long-term debt cycles, statistical analysis of them, what are the points of no return, rise of both left-wing and right-wing populous movements when the economy no longer works for substantial chunks of citizens near the end of the long term debt cycle, how those populous movements tend to end, Bretton Woods agreement to try to build a stable economic structure after world war II, all the alternative asset classes that often only make sense except near the end of the long-term debt cycle. And don't forget that history will never repeat, it only rhymes. It's a pickle.

3

no_crying 2 days ago

I spend sometime thinking this, since most large wealth holders are aware of the inflationary play governments around the world is doing, then they would leverage themselves or do something to get ahead further in the game. the longer the period to land the aircraft, the risky it is that aircraft will crash harder. still thinking if inflation is a zero sum gain and if game theory applies here.

1

thisispoopoopeepee 2 days ago

allow mild inflation (slightly above average) on top of paying it back... also.... stop using government funds for things that have low ROI.....might help.....

1

[deleted] 2 days ago

[deleted]

2

BigRocksFirst 2 days ago

I won't argue, and it is now the Fed's stated goal. To have higher than normal inflation for as long as it takes. They phrased it as being as long as it takes for the average inflation to get back to the target, which is a hand waving way of telling the public "don't be alarmed at this uncomfortable level of inflation, it's just to get the average back to a comfortable 2%!". They have also said that despite the economic costs of the money printing and inflation, now is absolutely not the time to worry about that because of the problem that will happen if it's not done. Their view seems to be that they would rather take that than the economic destruction of tons of people being out of work. They explicitly said they are willing for the stock market to inflate crazily if that's what it takes to protect from that economic destruction. The best metaphor I can come up with at this point, is that there may be no way to land this plane with the plane surviving, but they are trying to keep the passengers alive during the "softer" landing. Yes, if the plane survives that's a bonus. There are a few jobs I am glad I do not have right now, and they are being a school teacher, principal or superintendent, and being responsible for monetary or fiscal policy. Right now, if they do their job right, they piss off a lot of people and are misnderstood by almost everyone. There is no way I could land the plane without crashing it.

2

SteveFoerster 3 days ago

Thievery Corporation's song about the IMF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1FZwsGjVsg

The lyrics are fire:

When the bank man comes to your door
Better know you'll always be poor
Bank loans and policies
They can't make our people free

You live on the blood of my people
Everyone knows you've come to steal
You come like the thieves in the night
The whole world is ready to fight

If you go to Lagos, what you find, vampires
If you go to Kinshasa, what you find, vampires
If you go to Darfur, what you find, vampires
If you go to Malabo, what you find, vampires

Lies and theft
Guns and Debt
Life and Death
IMF

9

foreverwantrepreneur 3 days ago

There shouldn’t be an IMF.

3

TheMischievousBadger 3 days ago

Buy gold and silver right now

0

infernalr00t 3 days ago

Unless you are buying gold bullion you only own an IOU. Instead buy Bitcoin.

0

EMPERORTRUMPTER 3 days ago

and own nothing

6

TheMadPyro 3 days ago

Nothing like taking financial advice from unpaid internet strangers

2

BismuthMoon 3 days ago

Now you know why duuurrr cobid. The reset. You need a scamdemic

0

fresheneesz 3 days ago

> scamdemic You're a fucking moron with your head in the sand (or more likely far up trump's ass)

0

BismuthMoon 3 days ago

Another sad sufferer of TDS. Best of wishes.

0

hash_me_harder redditor for 2 weeks 3 days ago

henceforth, I hereby call for A Middle Finger Moment.

MFM, if you will.

4

bundleogrundle 3 days ago

This is a just a marketing release with buzz words to make the general public think this is good for them.

“ Our unprecedented action was only possible thanks to our members’ generous support. The doubling of the New Arrangements to Borrow and a new round of bilateral borrowing arrangements preserves this financial firepower. Members have also stepped up with essential contributions to our Catastrophe Containment – and Relief and Poverty Reduction and Growth—Trusts.

This has allowed us to support our low-income members with debt relief and to triple our concessional lending. We are engaging with members to further boost our concessional lending capacity adapt our lending toolkit and increase support for capacity development.”

What a load of bull shit. What low income group are they helping?

12

Ferdo306 3 days ago

It's bullshit. They are talking about sustainable finance and large growth like they are interconnected and not opposites

5

AmazingSuperPupils 3 days ago

The only Breton I want is Breton water crackers! I love snacks!

1

xboox 3 days ago

A shit ton of pretty words from our slave-drivers.
They'll do whatever it takes to remain in charge.

15

free-speech-1 2 days ago

This

2

oldskoolr 3 days ago

A video of the speech can be watched here

https://youtu.be/uTmfwklFM-M

1

SuspiciousSociety1 3 days ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enmHW4gCkAY

live now

1

BubblegumTitanium 3 days ago

IMF ICO with a 90% premine and a dev tax all based on chaumian ecash - fuckk this

8

Btcmaan 3 days ago

IMF is a scam.

25

Fiach_Dubh 3 days ago

There was a recent panel with the deputy governor of the bank of Canada of Canada on this very topic. Related video: https://youtu.be/vRgq9UN8KQ0

2

cipher-zer0 3 days ago

Recommended reading: The Creature From Jekyll Island

20

3

25 1 3

jaimewarlock 1 day ago

I got in a big argument with Brian over a business deal that went bad. While he was probably legally in the right, I told him that he was morally wrong.

He could have just totally ignored me after that, there really wasn't anything I could have done about the situation. However, later upon reflection, he agreed with me and gave me 10 bitcoins compensation.

Sure, I am just one person, but ever since that event, I will always consider him to have a very high level of integrity.

1

harrynyce 1 day ago

I'm not questioning his integrity in his personal life, I'm sure he's a decent guy (even though he screwed you, by your own admission) who thinks he makes moral choices, but money has a tendency to corrupt people... and being in [bed with JPMorgan](https://decrypt.co/29832/jp-morgans-ceo-held-secret-meetings-with-the-coinbase-ceo) tends to force a person's hand, especially when said person wants their business to attain banking services and attain a seat at the big boy table and not fear running afoul of regulatory agencies. If he'll bend you over for <six figures, imagine what he's capable of now that he's in Jamie Dimon's pocket and deals are worth 10 - 100x more. He sold you out, then bought you off, but i very much respect you sharing your perspective and have no reason to doubt your sincerity. Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you? Somehow i doubt Mr. Armstrong woke up the next day and immediately went to correct his error, i have a sneaking suspicion by the time he did it, 10 BTC was rather insignificant to his bottom line. It's not like he dropped a briefcase of cash on your doorstep, it was barely an inconvenience to his world. But now I'm just speculating a ton. I'd love to be wrong, but i think we both know he's spineless. There's plenty of decent human beings without the capacity or courage to stand up to Wall Street or Uncle Sam (not that there's much of a difference). Heck, I'd sell out every user on Reddit for the ability to be the first crypto IPO in the USofA. Someone has to take those secret meetings, at least we always knew the Gemini twins were corporate whores, i held out hope and made excuses for Brian (and Cbase) because there were so few other options when trying to assist neophyte crypto users. Oh well, not the first time I've been a poor judge of character. Nor the last. Stupid hippie hopefulness always making me want to give folks the benefit of the doubt. Regardless of my unhinged rant, i do genuinely appreciate you taking the time to share this anecdotal tale. Please stay safe, sir.

1

jaimewarlock Yesterday

>Mind if i inquire how long was the length of time between when the deal went bad and when he attempted (or did) make things right with you? A few months. And thinking back, I realize that one of his programmers probably had more to do with the situation than he did. He was involved in a lot of projects at the time. I prefer to think that once he had a clear picture of what transpired, he made things right for me.

1

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon 3 days ago

Read the Whitepaper. It´s political.

6

harrynyce 3 days ago

💯

2

soontobesilenced redditor for 3 months 3 days ago

the same can be said about any ceo, since you can't be a ceo without bowing to your govt masters.

what have you done for bitcoin? because coinbase has certainly done lots for bitcoin.

1

tk11811 3 days ago

Remember when Coinbase was against Bitcoin when they supported Segwit2x?

1

scotty321 3 days ago

Brian Armstrong is 100% correct, and we would live in a much better world if more CEOs had the courage to follow in his footsteps.

A corporation is not a campaign rally, and a corporation is certainly not a front for the terrorist Marxist organization known as Black Lives Matter, which is a fundraising initiative for the Democratic Socialist Communist Party. A corporation should never bow down to the mob.

Some educational material for you:

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/06/23/black-lives-matter-marxists/

https://fee.org/articles/is-black-lives-matter-marxist-no-and-yes/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lRcEb3zwec4t/

0

jeremyisreal1 redditor for 3 months 3 days ago

Call him what you want, he's a huge reason why BTC is as popular as it is today. Every other website is impossible to use without intense study.

Coinbase is a necessary evil until a better company comes along, and I define better by convincing the largest portion of a group to use it.

3

BitcoinIsSimple 3 days ago

I didn't read the article but how else can you runs bitcoin exchnage. Are you supposed to do what arthur from bitmex supposedly did, and then get arrested or would you really rather there be no centralised exchanges at all

1

harrynyce 3 days ago

You can run an exchange without censoring the thoughts of your employees. DeFi would be great, but we're not there yet. We're still working on basic adoption for the masses while the technology (hopefully) scales.

2

W944 3 days ago

>without censoring the thoughts of your employees. Yet it's okay for employees to coerce their management to follow their political groupthink? The CEO guy is allowed to not give a fuck about blm. He's just the only one open about it. No corporation gives a fuck about blm. They all put out their cucky statements to appease the mob for a few weeks and you guys eat it all up and take the pitchforks to the next village. Get over it.

1

BitcoinIsSimple 3 days ago

I'm talking about centralised exchanges because that's what's here for the most part

1

BitcoinXio Moderator - Bitcoin is Freedom 3 days ago

Downvoted for the title. With that said, I can’t imagine the struggle it is to run a giant company that is a leader in the crypto space, but basically telling all staff they can’t talk about certain topics or get fired is really the wrong way to go about things. Especially since crypto is rooted in controversy and going against mainstream ideas and regulations, it just seems whacky to push this sort of agenda at a crypto company.

5

harrynyce 3 days ago

Thank you for the thoughtful (and correct) analysis on a very complex and nuanced topic. I should have considered my title more carefully, trying to convey a certain level of emphasis without being quite so vulgar.

0

5boros 3 days ago

Oh no, a major mainstream financial institution's CEO is complying with the government, and as a result excelling at earning his investors millions. What has this world come to?

9

somedaysitsdark 3 days ago

I didn't see anything outrageous in the article.

8

NilacTheGrim 3 days ago

Yeah I agree with you. TBH discussing politics at work can be very toxic and destructive. I can see why a company would have such a policy. It's like discussing religion at work too -- you're just going to end up taking a side and it will get in the way of productivity. Do it on your own time. I see nothing wrong with this at all. Corporations are totalitarian systems.. you should realize that going in to one. They are under no obligation to pay you to waste their time. If you want maximal freedom don't work for a corporation. I see nothing wrong with what they are doing.

15

dbvbtm 3 days ago

I still don't understand all the heat. Coinbase is a private company, it doesn't have to pay you to organize and participate in political events, that's not your job there. Armstrong was nice enough to offer severance pay to these workers.

This is a non-issue. People need to learn their place.

2

harrynyce 3 days ago

Yes, please shut up and sit down. Don't bother thinking for yourself, Daddy Armstrong will tell you exactly how to handle things. After all, he's nice.

0

dbvbtm 3 days ago

You are free to do what you want in your spare time. Don't disrupt the workplace with politics. When has this ever been okay?

3

smoothID redditor for 3 months 3 days ago

Damn, my manager is censoring my GTA5 gaming sessions at work. Saying it's a "distraction." WTF

2

AmazingSuperPupils 3 days ago

This guy makes authoritarian workplace bitcoiners cum their shorts everyone this gets brought up.

3

HauntingCorpse 3 days ago

F**k sjw morons

1

AmazingSuperPupils 3 days ago

Yeah fuck justice and social issues. Fuck anti fascists. Me and my homies love fascism.

0

HauntingCorpse 3 days ago

I absolutely love the brainwashed nerds who use the word ‘fascism’ every chance they get.

3

harrynyce 3 days ago

You mean, Fox News attempting to terrify their susceptible viewer base with constant cries of "Antifa is coming, antifa is coming!" You love licking boots, eh?

0

HauntingCorpse 3 days ago

Lol. Are you one of the antifa bois that wears fishnets under his skinny jeans?

1

xboox 3 days ago

WTF did I just read?
Report this low quality garbage

1

xboox 3 days ago

If someone's paying you to work -- shut your month & work dummy! :)
Simple.

1

tk11811 3 days ago

Kim jong un would love it if you worked for him.

1

AmazingSuperPupils 3 days ago

The way you value labor and time is so fucked

1

harrynyce 3 days ago

More like, _"Open your mouth & work dummy!"_ Now... on your knees! /s What, you don't do **everything** that is asked of you while at the workplace? Tsk tsk, you terrible worker drone, stop trying to think for yourself. Now get back in line.

0

tamerlane888 3 days ago

Business is business!

1

tk11811 3 days ago

Looks like some people love this guy more than Bitcoin.

1

harrynyce 3 days ago

Amazed the number of folk around here lining up to lick his boots. Color me surprised. Did I accidentally get stuck with the BCH fools, or something?

2

DJBunnies 3 days ago

Low effort garbage.

1

time_wasted504 3 days ago

OR: hes trying to run a business and really doesnt want to take a political side?

govt cuck v fence sitter? Which is which?

8

sammyb67 3 days ago

Exactly!! These pussys that say this stupid shit clearly have never run a business and by the way, try opposing Uncle Sam and see what happens to your business! Ask google, Apple, etc.

0

time_wasted504 3 days ago

The real money gives to both parties and keeps their mouth shut. Its a win/win for them

4

harrynyce 3 days ago

Except he got into the wrong business, crypto is inherently political. It directly challenges there most powerful institutions on the planet. I guess I forget just how many are just here for, __moon when? Lambo! __ and could give a shit about anything else. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

2

time_wasted504 3 days ago

>crypto is inherently political. no, its not. Crypto is inherently maths. It is not left/right/up/down or any political persuasion

3

harrynyce 3 days ago

You're talking about specifically the technologies, while forgetting the use-cases -- it's political. You don't have to agree, it's not up for debate. Fact.

1

Phrygian1221 2 days ago

Maybe its political to you? That would explain it! I use bitcoin as a store of value and a means of payment/money transfer. Bitcoin isn't political to me.

0

harrynyce 2 days ago

You have chosen to ignore the political aspects and focus on your specific use-case, but i assure you, read the whitepaper: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf It is definitely political. I suspect you (and your government) would almost certainly agree that it's political once you have triggered enough taxable events, but choosing to ignore it and treat crypto in the same way you might a precious metal, sure it's easy to avoid the politics... but don't try to exchange that for anything, that might become political. Again, you don't have to agree with me, but you're wrong. Also, if Cbase were to hand your information over to your government, i think that could become political pretty quickly: https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/81458/coinbase-transparency-report-2020

1

sammyb67 3 days ago

Exactly

1

1nv1s1blek1d 3 days ago

It's like people have never worked at a corporation before. Financial services monitor almost everything you do. This is nothing new. I wouldn't be surprised if they monitored the conversations on Slack. If your employee's job could theoretically influence the market, you would want to know about it. You are working in their ecosystem under their terms. There is no trust when it comes to the money game. I am pretty sure BlackRock, Fidelity, and Goldman Sachs do the same thing.

2

newthrowawayfor2017 3 days ago

Money and politics shouldn't mix anyway.

3

rasaxar Redditor for 3 months. 3 days ago

Coinbase man bad.

4

Think-notlikedasheep Redditor for 1 months. 4 days ago

So if a company is totally NOT obsessed with politics, and actually wants to do what its business is about, that's eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil. /sarc

Whackjobs say this.

5

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

Did you read the article?

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 4 days ago

Telling SJW idiots to piss off isn’t censorship, it’s the best course of action

17

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

It's a pretty clear example of censorship in the workplace. Just because you happen to agree with the motivation for censoring employees doesn't negate the fact that it's censorship.

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 3 days ago

Not every business has to be in the business of putting up with psychos.

2

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees, but that doesn't mean it isn't censorship. Asking someone to delete political posts they previously made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.

0

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 3 days ago

Nutjobs trying to shut down businesses that don’t support Burn Loot Murder is a better example.

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

The US has a violent, militarized police force that is literally killing citizens in the street and you have the gall to defend them. You're either on the side of the people or the side of the violent police state. I know what side I'm on.

2

HauntingCorpse Redditor for 5 months. 3 days ago

Just go be a normal person and see who kills you first, a cop, or a gangbanger.

0

[deleted] 3 days ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

Coinbase has the *right* to censor their employees. I'm not arguing against that. However, it's still censorship. Asking someone to delete previous posts and comments they made is just about the clearest example of censorship I can think of.

1

[deleted] 3 days ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

Being given the choice to leave doesn't negate the fact that it's censorship. It's the equivalent of saying "If you don't want the goverment to censor you then you can leave the country." Censorship does not need to employ brute force, you just made that definition up.

1

[deleted] 3 days ago

[deleted]

0

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

You just made up another definition. Find me a single definition of censorship that specifies brute force or prior freedom of speech. I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with. The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way. Also since when are goverments required to uphold freedom of speech laws? That would be news to a lot of goverments around the world.

1

DetroitMotorShow Redditor for 2 months. 3 days ago

https://www.hrexaminer.com/is-there-free-speech-at-work/ You have rather weak understanding of what companies are. Private businesses are not street corners to stage protests where freedom of speech laws apply. You cant cry censorship over company's policy - its absurd and laughable. Employees are free to find a job that comes with free speech. > The posts in question were on Slack, an internal messaging app. It doesn't affect their reputation in any way. Certainly does. If the news gets out that CB employees are doing woke things using official business/company communication platform, it would hurt CB's reputation. > I guess people in China can't be censored because they never had freedom of speech to begin with. Again, false equivalence. Governments are meant to uphold free speech. The fact that CCP doesnt allow free speech doesnt take away the premise that freedom of speech is something that a government offers its citizens. Private companies dont offer employees freedom of speech - they arent a charity.

1

Thc420Vato 4 days ago

I hate Coinbase, but i sure as hell love when SJW's get their asses handed to them.

7

ManyArtichoke Gold | QC: BTC 39, CC 37 | TraderSubs 10 3 days ago

You would prefer to work somewhere that censors private communicate channels and asks you to remove previous posts that you made?

1

Thc420Vato 3 days ago

I ain't woke enough to answer on your question.

1

1 3

4 12

Jon Matonis - @jonmatonis

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

21 119

Nick Szabo⚡️ - @NickSzabo4

RT @coinbase: As part of our commitment to being the most trusted venue to interact with cryptocurrency, we are releasing our first Transparency Report. The report summarizes government requests that we received for customer account info during the first half of 2020. https://t.co/GCjueNlzZy

180 594

Ryan Selkis - @twobitidiot

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

13 95

Erik Voorhees - @ErikVoorhees

This is a really good practice. Note that zero companies outside of the crypto industry do this. https://t.co/YUebBP01ym

2 29

Peter Van Valkenburgh - @valkenburgh

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

2 14

Neeraj K. Agrawal - @NeerajKA

RT @jerrybrito: 1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

1 9

Jerry Brito - @jerrybrito

1/ Glad to see Coinbase publishing a transparency report, joining companies like Kraken. Hopefully this becomes an industry standard. https://t.co/vQNrBj4YEH

1 9

Reuben Bramanathan - @bramanathan

RT @iampaulgrewal: I’m pleased to share news of Coinbase’s first transparency report. It’s critical that our community and the public at large understand the scope of government requests for information and our efforts to respond. https://t.co/TQ6LjfrU3x

5 23

Matt Odell - @matt_odell

RT @nobsbitcoin: Transparency at Coinbase > today we’re releasing a Transparency Report that shares insights into how we handle legitimate government requests for some customer data https://t.co/BWSFHYSQW7 archive: https://t.co/4NJLxMkxGy https://t.co/jswGw44Nfn

2 3

Andrea O'Sullivan - @anjiecast

RT @coinbase: As part of our commitment to being the most trusted venue to interact with cryptocurrency, we are releasing our first Transparency Report. The report summarizes government requests that we received for customer account info during the first half of 2020. https://t.co/GCjueNlzZy

92 279

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

RT @brian_armstrong: Hopefully this gives more transparency into the kind of data requests we get from government. We'll continue to push back where we see requests that are overly broad or inappropriate. https://t.co/4wpQdQxVyx

27 103

Brian Armstrong - @brian_armstrong

Hopefully this gives more transparency into the kind of data requests we get from government. We'll continue to push back where we see requests that are overly broad or inappropriate. https://t.co/4wpQdQxVyx

27 103

SocialSuicideSquad 3 days ago

FDA whaaaaaaa

Also USPIS has way more than I would have expected.

IRS are the only ones that feel legitimate to me.

1

karoman25 Redditor for 2 months. 3 days ago

Was surprised that so many came from Germany 🇩🇪

1

tylersburden Hong Kong 4 days ago

Sorry, your submission has been manually removed by a human!

Your submission is better suited to another subreddit. This may be present in the flair text (top left of your submission title). If not, here are a few which may apply;

/r/AskUK for general questions Brits may be able to answer
/r/AskABrit for questions from tourists and others about the country, customs, norms, etc
/r/AskReddit for questions which are better answered by any Redditor
/r/UKPolitics for posts of a specifically political nature
/r/UKVisa for questions related to British visas
/r/UKPersonalFinance for posts related to finance in the UK
/r/LegalAdviceUK for legal queries
/r/HousingUK for issues with landlords, renting, buying, etc
/r/DWPHelp for assistance with the welfare system (Housing Benefit, DLA, PIP, JSA, UC, etc)
/r/DIYUK for discussion regarding home renovation, repair, etc.
/r/MentalHealthUK to discuss ones mental wellbeing
/r/UKJobs to seek advice on your employment
/r/UniUK for discussion related to universities, their courses, life experiences, etc

If you believe this message is posted in error, message the /r/uk team and include a link to this post. Please don't do this lightly, we're very busy and have likely acted correctly.

1

Oh_its_that_asshole Antrim 4 days ago

No shit? People weren't using Coinbase to buy their bitcoins for darknet drugs were they?

2

cprxrk 4 days ago

You’d be surprised lol

1

Internet-Fair 4 days ago

It doesn’t surprise me that bitcoin is used for drug purchases. It surprises me that the UK police dwarf all other countries.

2

Oh_its_that_asshole Antrim 4 days ago

UK is up there with China in terms of how much it routinely uses surveillance on its own citizens.

1

1 2

4 2

9 4

Think-notlikedasheep Redditor for 1 months. 3 days ago

"Not your keys, not your crypto" posted by someone in 8...7...6...

1

Cryptodragonnz 4 days ago

With ordinary banks you don't even need this. Withdraw 20% of deposited funds and the bank will have no available funds left.

0

sudospectral 3 days ago

They'll use their assets to borrow money from up the chain to the discount window in order to satisfy those withdrawals. That bank isn't even balance sheet insolvent and the FDIC doesn't need to get involved. They just won't be able to loan money unless they get more deposits. All you've done is discover liquid and illiquid assets.

2

dgerard 3 days ago

wow, that would really suck if banks weren't insured against this specific thing

6

Cryptodragonnz 3 days ago

They literally aren't. They only hold a small percentage in assets of the actual deposit balances. For example, in Cypress a banking crisis resulted in the banks having to slash the balances of account holders so they could remain open.

0

Suishou 3 days ago

People here aren’t willing to dig into the dirty details behind the FDIC “guarantees”...the data is all there that shows it won’t insure people for the stated 250k when there is a major event.

0

happyscrappy IT Specialist 3 days ago

The "Full Faith and Credit" of the US Government is behind the FDIC. It is explicitly stated. https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/4000-2660.html It essentially cannot fail. In the worst case the US would just print money to give to you. The existence of this backing basically means that they may never have to pay out because selling a bank to another bank at a discount requires less capital (up to and including none) than repaying lost money.

4

Cryptodragonnz 3 days ago

Why do people think I was only talking about US banks?

1

happyscrappy IT Specialist 3 days ago

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to Suishou. And he said FDIC and impugned their guarantees. So my response was appropriate.

2

dgerard 3 days ago

>Cypress

13

devliegende 3 days ago

First prize for posting the most ignorant comment of the day.

7

azoundria2 4 days ago

It works just fine as it always has. You just need to wait for Roosevelt to increase the currency supply a bit.

1

aShittierShitTier4u 4 days ago

I just had to wonder, who will be the Terry Childs of the crypto world? Most would bet on Craig Wright, but I think he would crumble under pressure in a cell.

Childs sat in jail for years, refusing to divulge his password to a San Francisco government computer. He had related charges, but his refusal enhanced his sentence. I always thought I would gladly give the password up to get out of jail. Maybe Childs really took Henry Thoreau to heart.

1

james_pic 4 days ago

It's OK, the key holder has merely been arrested. I'm sure they'll get out eventually. It's not like they've died suddenly in India. It's a perfectly reasonable business continuity plan that if a single individual in your organisation is incapacitated, you just wait for them to return.

15

azoundria2 4 days ago

It might be OK, but is it OKEx?

1

0101111000101010 4 days ago

I mean it's not normal for people at banks to ever get arrested

5

meowmeow26 4 days ago

It's perfectly normal in Hong Kong for people to get arrested for no good reason. Not so normal elsewhere.

5

SnapshillBot 4 days ago

My business teacher laughed at me today for mentioning bitcoin :(

Snapshots:

this is perfectly normal, it happen... - archive.org, archive.today*

I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers

8

thchax Tin 4 days ago

Annndd this is the reason why no one should keep their crypto on exchanges.

1

SocialSuicideSquad 4 days ago

Ho boy.

1

nice2yz Bronze 4 days ago

Yup, this may get messy.

1

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

Select

© 2020 Token Daily

Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain

Select

© 2020 Token Daily

🙌 Login to Token Daily