YouTube is Named in BitConnect “Ponzi Scheme” Lawsuit ...

07-09 17:33 - 'Bitcoin to hit $30K before next correction; TRON = ponzi scheme?! | Cryptocurrency News | Chepicap' (youtube.com) by /u/Findingthecure removed from /r/Bitcoin within 95-105min

Bitcoin to hit $30K before next correction; TRON = ponzi scheme?! | Cryptocurrency News | Chepicap
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: Findingthecure
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

01-04 20:43 - 'Bitcoin is the Biggest Ponzi Scheme In History' (youtube.com) by /u/jamestroyofficial removed from /r/Bitcoin within 39-49min

Bitcoin is the Biggest Ponzi Scheme In History
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: jamestroyofficial
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Scams Youtube Advertisements Ponzi Scheme Fraud Scam Advertising

submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAllTV [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Scams Youtube Advertisements Ponzi Scheme Fraud Scam Advertising

Bitcoin Scams Youtube Advertisements Ponzi Scheme Fraud Scam Advertising submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

01-02 05:42 - 'Bitcoin Scams Youtube Advertisements Ponzi Scheme Fraud Scam Advertising' (youtube.com) by /u/My30sblog removed from /r/Bitcoin within 33-43min

Bitcoin Scams Youtube Advertisements Ponzi Scheme Fraud Scam Advertising
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: My30sblog
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: Bitcoin enters Ponzi Scheme stage-Youtube Video by HealthCare Ranger /r/MGTOW

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: Bitcoin enters Ponzi Scheme stage-Youtube Video by HealthCare Ranger /MGTOW submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin will NEVER reach it's ATH anymore.

People should have much more healthy approach to cryptocurrencies than "get rich quick" and should use bitcoin even if it was going to take 100 years to break ATH again.
Only then the whole system makes sense, otherwise, even if Bitcoin was not meant to be a Ponzi Scheme and obviously is not a Ponzi Scheme, it is actually approached by many "investors" as Ponzi Scheme and they hope to be at the bottom of it. That is simply wrong.
If different crypto news stopped speculating about the price all the time it would be beneficial for the quality of the whole crypto sphere. If people stopped being obsessed by the price, it would be good too.
This is an honest call to everyone to start treating this great invention as it's meant to be - digital money. Including crypto news websites and youtubers who think that putting higher expected bitcoin price in the title will bring more clicks (and sadly, it usually does).
One says 1 million USD in 1 year, another says 10 million USD and so on... stop it, please. You are doing it wrong.
submitted by mintme_com to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin will NEVER reach it's ATH anymore.

People should have much more healthy approach to cryptocurrencies than "get rich quick" and should use bitcoin even if it was going to take 100 years to break ATH again.
Only then the whole system makes sense, otherwise, even if Bitcoin was not meant to be a Ponzi Scheme and obviously is not a Ponzi Scheme, it is actually approached by many "investors" as Ponzi Scheme and they hope to be at the bottom of it. That is simply wrong.
If different crypto news stopped speculating about the price all the time it would be beneficial for the quality of the whole crypto sphere. If people stopped being obsessed by the price, it would be good too.
This is an honest call to everyone to start treating this great invention as it's meant to be - digital money. Including crypto news websites and youtubers who think that putting higher expected bitcoin price in the title will bring more clicks (and sadly, it usually does).
One says 1 million USD in 1 year, another says 10 million USD and so on... stop it, please. You are doing it wrong.
submitted by mintme_com to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The Truth about Bitcoin?

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to conspiracy [link] [comments]

The Truth about Bitcoin?

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

The Truth about Bitcoin?

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to Money [link] [comments]

Beware of the scam that is LIVE now on youtube!

Beware of the scam that is LIVE now on youtube!
Yesterday Neebs Gaming Youtube Channel got hacked. The channel that has 1.9 million subscribers is now being used by the hacker ho hid all the videos and changed banners. He is making FAKE live stream with fake links and Ponzi Scheme, where he promises you 10x in returns if you send crypto to his address! He won't send you anything back! DO NOT SEND ANY COIN TO HIM!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-PUJPBe440
Link to the "live" stream. He is faking coinbase pro. The stream is fake, if you watching it DO NOT SEND money to his address and do NOT click on the links!
UPDATE:
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1H8Ayqrnz1LYzNT4UvPsjugZdiY5udpqxx
So far he scammed over 2 bitcoins, worth over 19, 000 Euros.
Update 2:
Youtube staff stepped up and removed the stream. https://twitter.com/NeebsOfficial/status/1229121494451728385
https://preview.redd.it/x05mftenqbh41.png?width=1351&format=png&auto=webp&s=da1bf86e1b3b121a7c9310f36493a8cbac2d684d
submitted by bamila to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Trevon James erased 39 of his YouTube videos promoting BitConnect yesterday. Looks like he starts getting worried about the class action lawsuit against him

Trevon James erased 39 of his YouTube videos promoting BitConnect yesterday. Looks like he starts getting worried about the class action lawsuit against him submitted by sopun to ethtrader [link] [comments]

The Truth about Bitcoin?

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to economy [link] [comments]

Bitcoin and Meritocratic Capitalism

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to Capitalism [link] [comments]

The Truth about Bitcoin?

Part 1/4 - NSA Connection:
First off, the SHA-256 algorithm, which stands for Secure Hash Algorithm 256, is a member of the SHA-2 cryptographic hash functions designed by the NSA and first published in 2001.
SHA-256, like other hash functions, takes any input and produces an output (often called a hash) of fixed length. The output of a hashing algorithm such as SHA-256 will always be the same length - regardless of the input size. Specifically, the output is, as the name suggests, 256 bits.
Moreover, all outputs appear completely random and offer no information about the input that created it.
The Bitcoin Network utilises the SHA-256 algorithm for mining and the creation of new addresses.
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? What does Satoshi Nakamoto mean?
Out of respect for their anonymity, it would be rude to speculate in a video about who Satoshi Nakamoto is likely to be. The reality is, it's not important. Let me explain: Any human being can be attacked. Jesus could come back from the dead, and there would be haters. Therefore, the Satoshi Nakamoto approach neutralises the natural human herd behaviour, exacerbated by the media, to attack and discredit. This is a very important part of Bitcoin's success thus far. Also, from a security perspective, those who wish to dox Satoshi Nakamoto in a video are essentially putting his, or her, or their, life at risk...for the sake of views.
As a genius who has produced an innovation not just from a technical perspective but also a monetary perspective, they should be treated with more respect than that.
As for the name Satoshi Nakamoto, I would speculate that it is a homage to Tatsuaki Okamoto and Satoshi Obana - two cryptographers from Japan. There is another reason for the name, but that...is confidential.
In 1996, the NSA's Cryptology Division of their Office of Information Security Research and Technology published a paper titled: "How to make a mint: The cryptography of anonymous electronic cash", first publishing it in an MIT mailing list and later, in 1997, in the American University Law Review. One of the researchers they referenced was Tatsuaki Okamoto.

Part 2/4 - 'Crypto Market':
Most of the crypto market is a scam.
By the way, this was predicted very early on in the Bitcoin Talk forums - check out this interaction from November 8th, 2010:
"if bitcoin really takes off I can see lots of get-rich-quick imitators coming on the scene: gitcoin, nitcoin, witcoin, titcoin, shitcoin...
Of course the cheap imitators will disappear as quickly as those 1990s "internet currencies", but lots of people will get burned along the way."
To which Bitcoin OG Gavin Andresen replies:
"I agree - we're in the Wild West days of open-source currency. I expect people will get burned by scams, imitators, ponzi schemes and price bubbles."
"I don't think there's a whole lot that can be done about scammers, imitators and ponzi schemes besides warning people to be careful with their money (whether dollars, euros or bitcoins)."
Now, on the one hand, lack of regulation is more meritocratic (as you don't have to be an accredited investor just to get access).
On the other hand, it means that crypto is, as Gavin said, a Wild West environment, with many cowboys in the Desert. Be careful.
This is the same with most online courses - particularly 'How to get rich quick' courses - however with crypto you have an exponential increase in the supply of victims during the bull cycles so it is particularly prevalent during those times.
In addition to this, leverage trading exchanges, which are no different to casinos, prey on naive retail traders who:
A) Think they can outsmart professional traders with actual risk management skills; and
B) Think they can outsmart the exchanges themselves who have an informational advantage as well as an incentive to chase stop losses and liquidate positions.

Part 3/4 - CBDCs:
The Fed and Central Banks around the world have printed themselves into a corner.
Quantitative easing was the band-aid for the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, and more recent events have propelled the rate of money printing to absurd levels.
This means that all currencies are in a race to zero - and it becomes a game of who can print more fiat faster.
The powers that be know that this fiat frenzy is unsustainable, and that more and more people are becoming aware that it is a debt based system, based on nothing.
The monetary system devised by bankers, for bankers, in 1913 on Jekyll Island and supercharged in 1971 is fairly archaic and also does not allow for meritocratic value transfer - fiat printing itself increases inequality.
They, obviously, know this (as it is by design).
The issue (for them) is that more and more people are starting to become aware of this.
Moving to a modernised monetary system will allow those who have rigged the rules of the game for the last Century to get away scot-free.
It will also pave the way for a new wealthy, and more tech literate, elite to emerge - again predicted in the Bitcoin Talk forums.
Now...back to the powers that be.
Bitcoin provides a natural transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and what I would describe as Finance 2.0, but what are the benefits of CBDCs for the state?
More control, easier tax collection, more flexibility in monetary policy (i.e. negative interest rates) and generally a more efficient monetary system.
This leads us to the kicker: which is the war on cash. The cashless society was a fantasy just a few years ago, however now it doesn't seem so far fetched. No comment.

Part 4/4 - Bitcoin:
What about Bitcoin?
Well, Bitcoin has incredibly strong network effects; it is the most powerful computer network in the World.
But what about Bitcoin's reputation?
Bankers hate it.
Warren Buffett hates it.
Precisely, and the public hates bankers.
Sure, the investing public respects Buffett, but the general public perception of anyone worth $73 billion is not exactly at all time highs right now amid record wealth inequality.
In the grand scheme of things, the market cap of Bitcoin is currently around $179 billion.
For example, the market cap of Gold is around $9 trillion, which is 50x the Market Cap of Bitcoin.
Money has certain characteristics.
In my opinion, what makes Bitcoin unique is the fact that it has a finite total supply (21 million) and a predictable supply schedule via the halving events every 4 years, which cut in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is released into circulation.
Clearly, with these properties, it seems likely that Bitcoin could act as a meaningful hedge against inflation.
One of the key strengths of Bitcoin is the fact that the Network is decentralised...
Many people don't know that PayPal originally wanted to create a global currency similar to crypto.
Overall, a speculative thesis would be the following:
Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the most important entities of the 21st Century, and will accelerate the next transition of the human race.
Trusted third parties are security holes.
Bitcoin is the catalyst for Finance 2.0, whereby value transfer is conducted in a more meritocratic and decentralised fashion.
In 1964, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev designed the Kardashev Scale.
At the time, he was looking for signs of extraterrestrial life within cosmic signals.
The Scale has three categories, which are based on the amount of usable energy a civilisation has at its disposal, and the degree of space colonisation.
Generally, a Type 1 Civilisation has achieved mastery of its home planet (10^16W);
A Type 2 Civilisation has mastery over its solar system (10^26W);
and a Type 3 Civilisation has mastery over its Galaxy (10^36W).
We humans are a Type 0 Civilisation on this Scale.
Nonetheless, our exponential technological growth in the few decades indicates that we are somewhere between Type 0 and Type 1.
In fact, according to Carl Sagan's interpolated Kardashev Scale and recent global energy consumption, we are about 0.73.
Physicist Freeman Dyson estimated that within 200 years or so, we should attain Type 1 status.
As a technology that, through its decentralisation, links entities globally and makes value transfer between humans more efficient, Bitcoin could prove a key piece of our progression as a civilisation.
What are your thoughts?
Is it true...or false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oQLOqpP1ZM
submitted by financeoptimum to investing_discussion [link] [comments]

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019
I tried my best to be as accurate as possible, but if there are any errors, please let me know so I can fix. I believe this talk is important for all Bitcoin Cash supporters, and I wanted to provide it in written form so people can read it as well as watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOv0nmOe1_o For me, this was the first time I felt like I understood the issues Amaury's been trying to communicate, and I hope that reading this presentation might help others understand as well.
Bitcoin Cash’s Culture
“Okay. Hello? Can you hear me? The microphone is good, yeah?
Ok, so after that introduction, I’m going to do the only thing that I can do now, which is disappoint you, because well, that was quite something.
So usually I make technical talks and this time it’s going to be a bit different. I’m going to talk about culture in the Bitcoin Cash ecosystem. So first let’s talk about culture, like what is it? It’s ‘the social behaviors and norms found in human society.’
So we as the Bitcoin Cash community, we are a human society, or at least we look like it. You’re all humans as far as I know, and we have social behaviors and norms, and those social behaviors and norms have a huge impact on the project.
And the reason why I want to focus on that point very specifically is because we have better fundamentals and we have a better product and we are more useful than most other cryptos out there. And I think that’s a true statement, and I think this is a testimony of the success of BCH. But also, we are only just 3% of BTC’s value. So clearly there is something that we are not doing right, and clearly it’s not fundamental, it’s not product, it’s not usefulness. It’s something else, and I think this can be found somewhat in our culture.
So I have this quote here, from Naval Ravikant. I don’t know if you guys know him but he’s a fairly well known speaker and thinker, and he said, “Never trust anyone who does not annoy you from time to time, because it means that they are only telling you what you want to hear.”
And so today I am going to annoy you a bit, in addition to disappointing you, so yeah, it’s going to be very bad, but I feel like we kind of need to do it.
So there are two points, mainly, that I think our culture is not doing the right thing. And those are gonna be infrastructure and game theory. And so I’m going to talk a little bit about infrastructure and game theory.
Right, so, I think there are a few misconceptions by people that are not used to working in software infrastructure in general, but basically, it works like any other kind of infrastructure. So basically all kinds of infrastructure decay, and we are under the assumption that technology always gets better and better and better and never decays. But in terms of that, it actually decays all the time, and we have just a bunch of engineers working at many many companies that keep working at making it better and fighting that decay.
I’m going to take a few examples, alright. Right now if you want to buy a cathode ray tube television or monitor for your computer (I’m not sure why you want to do that because we have better stuff now), but if you want to buy that, it’s actually very difficult now. There are very little manufacturers that even know how to build them. We almost forgot as a human society how to build those stuff. Because, well, there was not as high of a demand for them as there was before, and therefore nobody really worked on maintaining the knowledge or the know how, and the factories, none of that which are required to build those stuff, and therefore we don’t build them. And this is the same for vinyl discs, right? You can buy vinyl disk today if you want, but it’s actually more expensive than it used to be twenty years ago.
We used to have space shuttles. Both Russia and US used to have space shuttles. And now only the US have space shuttles, and now nobody has space shuttles anymore.
And there is an even better counter example to that. It’s that the US, right now, is refining Uranium for nuclear weapons. Like on a regular basis there are people working on that problem. Except that the US doesn’t need any new uranium to make nuclear weapons because they are decommissioning the weapons that are too old and can reuse that uranium to build the new weapon that they are building. The demand for that is actually zero, and still there are people making it and they are just basically making it and storing it forever, and it’s never used. So why is the US spending money on that? Well you would say governments are usually pretty good at spending money on stuff that are not very useful, but in that case there is a very good reason. And the good reason is that they don’t want to forget how it’s done. Because maybe one day it’s going to be useful. And acquiring the whole knowledge of working with uranium and making enriched uranium, refining uranium, it’s not obvious. It’s a very complicated process. It involves very advanced engineering and physics, a lot of that, and keeping people working on that problem ensures that knowledge is kept through time. If you don’t do that, those people are going to retire and nobody will know how to do it. Right.
So in addition to decaying infrastructure from time to time, we can have zero days in software, meaning problems in the software that are not now exploited live on the network. We can have denial of service attack, we can have various failures on the network, or whatever else, so just like any other infrastructure we need people that essentially take care of the problem and fight the decay constantly doing maintenance and also be ready to intervene whenever there is some issue. And that means that even if there is no new work to be done, you want to have a large enough group of people that are working on that everyday just making it all nice and shiny so that when something bad happens, you have people that understand how the system works. So even if for nothing else, you want a large enough set of people working on infrastructure for that to be possible.
So we’re not quite there yet, and we’re very reliant on BTC. Because the software that we’re relying on to run the network is actually a fork to the BTC codebase. And this is not specific to Bitcoin Cash. This is also true for Litecoin, and Dash, and Zcash and whatever. There are many many crypotos that are just a fork of the Bitcoin codebase. And all those crypos they actually are reliant on BTC to do some maintenance work because they have smaller teams working on the infrastructure. And as a result any rational market cannot price those other currencies higher than BTC. It would just not make sense anymore. If BTC were to disappear, or were to fail on the market, and this problem is not addressed, then all those other currencies are going to fail with it. Right? And you know that may not be what we want, but that’s kind of like where we are right now.
So if we want to go to the next level, maybe become number one in that market, we need to fix that problem because it’s not going to happen without it.
So I was mentioning the 3% number before, and it’s always very difficult to know what all the parameters are that goes into that number, but one of them is that. Just that alone, I’m sure that we are going to have a lower value than BTC always as long as we don’t fix that problem.
Okay, how do we fix that problem? What are the elements we have that prevent us from fixing that problem? Well, first we need people with very specific skill sets. And the people that have experience in those skill sets, there are not that many of them because there are not that many places where you can work on systems involving hundreds of millions, if not billions of users, that do like millions of transactions per second, that have systems that have hundreds of gigabytes per second of throughput, this kind of stuff. There are just not that many companies in the world that operate on that scale. And as a result, the number of people that have the experience of working on that scale is also pretty much limited to the people coming out of those companies. So we need to make sure that we are able to attract those people.
And we have another problem that I talked about with Justin Bons a bit yesterday, that we don’t want to leave all that to be fixed by a third party.
It may seem nice, you know, so okay, I have a big company making good money, I’m gonna pay people working on the infrastructure for everybody. I’m gonna hire some old-time cypherpunk that became famous because he made a t-shirt about ERISA and i’m going to use that to promote my company and hire a bunch of developers and take care of the infrastructure for everybody. It’s all good people, we are very competent. And indeed they are very competent, but they don’t have your best interest in mind, they have their best interest in mind. And so they should, right? It’s not evil to have your own interest in mind, but you’ve got to remember that if you delegate that to others, they have their best interest in mind, they don’t have yours. So it’s very important that you have different actors that have different interests that get involved into that game of maintaining the infrastructure. So they can keep each other in check.
And if you don’t quite understand the value proposition for you as a business who builds on top of BCH, the best way to explain that to whoever is doing the financials of your company is as an insurance policy. The point of the insurance on the building where your company is, or on the servers, is so that if everything burns down, you can get money to get your business started and don’t go under. Well this is the same thing. Your business relies on some infrastructure, and if this infrastructure ends up going down, disappearing, or being taken in a direction that doesn’t fit your business, your business is toast. And so you want to have an insurance policy there that insures that the pieces that you’re relying on are going to be there for you when you need them.
Alright let’s take an example. In this example, I purposefully did not put any name because I don’t want to blame people. I want to use this as an example of a mistake that were made. I want you to understand that many other people have done many similar mistakes in that space, and so if all you take from what I’m saying here is like those people are bad and you should blame them, this is like completely the wrong stuff. But I also think it’s useful to have a real life example.
So on September 1st, at the beginning of the week, we had a wave of spam that was broadcasted on the network. Someone made like a bunch of transactions, and those were very visibly transactions that were not there to actually do transactions, they were there just to create a bunch of load on the network and try to disturb its good behavior.
And it turned out that most miners were producing blocks from 2 to 8 megabytes, while typical market demand is below half a megabyte, typically, and everything else above that was just spam, essentially. And if you ask any people that have experience in capacity planning, they are going to tell you that those limits are appropriate. The reason why, and the alternative to raising those limits that you can use to mitigate those side effects are a bit complicated and they would require a talk in and of itself to go into, so I’m going to just use an argument from authority here, but trust me, I know what I’m talking about here, and this is just like raising those limits is just not the solution. But some pool decided to increase that soft cap to 32 megs. And this has two main consequences that I want to dig in to explain what is not the right solution.
And the first one is that we have businesses that are building on BCH today. And those businesses are the ones that are providing value, they are the ones making our network valuable. Right? So we need to treat those people as first class citizens. We need to attract and value them as much as we can. And those people, they find themselves in the position where they can either dedicate their resources and their attention and their time to make their service better and more valuable for users, or maybe expand their service to more countries, to more markets, to whatever, they can do a lot of stuff, or they can spend their time and resources to make sure the system works not when you have like 10x the usual load, but also 100x the usual load. And this is something that is not providing value to them, this is something that is not providing value to us, and I would even argue that this is something that is providing negative value.
Because if those people don’t improve their service, or build new services, or expand their service to new markets, what’s going to happen is that we’re not going to do 100x. 100x happens because people provide useful services and people start using it. And if we distract those people so that they need to do random stuff that has nothing to do with their business, then we’re never going to do 100x. And so having a soft cap that is way way way above what is the usual market demand (32 megs is almost a hundred times what is the market demand for it), it’s actually a denial of service attack that you open for anyone that is building on the chain.
We were talking before, like yesterday we were asking about how do we attract developers, and one of the important stuff is that we need to value that over valuing something else. And when we take this kind of move, the signal that we send to the community, to the people working on that, is that people yelling very loudly on social media, their opinion is more valued than your work to make a useful service building on BCH. This is an extremely bad signal to send. So we don’t want to send those kind of signals anymore.
That’s the first order effect, but there’s a second order effect, and the second order effect is to scale we need people with experience in capacity planning. And as it turns out big companies like Google, and Facebook, and Amazon pay good money, they pay several 100k a year to people to do that work of capacity planning. And they wouldn’t be doing that if they just had to listen to people yelling on social media to find the answer. Right? It’s much cheaper to do the simple option, except the simple option is not very good because this is a very complex engineering problem. And not everybody is like a very competent engineer in that domain specifically. So put yourself in the shoes of some engineers who have skills in that particular area. They see that happening, and what do they see? The first thing that they see is that if they join that space, they’re going to have some level of competence, some level of skill, and it’s going to be ignored by the leaders in that space, and ignoring their skills is not the best way to value it as it turns out. And so because of that, they are less likely to join it. But there is a certain thing that they’re going to see. And that is that because they are ignored, some shit is going to happen, some stuff are going to break, some attacks are going to be made, and who is going to be called to deal with that? Well, it’s them. Right? So not only are they going to be not valued for their stuff, the fact that they are not valued for their stuff is going to put them in a situation where they have to put out a bunch of fires that they would have known to avoid in the first place. So that’s an extremely bad value proposition for them to go work for us. And if we’re going to be a world scale currency, then we need to attract those kinds of people. And so we need to have a better value proposition and a better signaling that we send to them.
Alright, so that’s the end of the first infrastructure stuff. Now I want to talk about game theory a bit, and specifically, Schelling points.
So what is a Schelling point? A Schelling point is something that we can agree on without especially talking together. And there are a bunch of Schelling points that exist already in the Bitcoin space. For instance we all follow the longest chain that have certain rules, right? And we don’t need to talk to each other. If I’m getting my wallet and I have some amount of money and I go to any one of you here and you check your wallet and you have that amount of money and those two amounts agree. We never talk to each other to come to any kind of agreement about how much each of us have in terms of money. We just know. Why? Because we have a Schelling point. We have a way to decide that without really communicating. So that’s the longest chain, but also all the consensus rules we have are Schelling points. So for instance, we accept blocks up to a certain size, and we reject blocks that are bigger than that. We don’t constantly talk to each other like, ‘Oh by the way do you accept 2 mb blocks?’ ‘Yeah I do.’ ‘Do you accept like 3 mb blocks? And tomorrow will you do that?’
We’re not doing this as different actors in the space, constantly worrying each other. We just know there is a block size that is a consensus rule that is agreed upon by almost everybody, and that’s a consensus rule. And all the other consensus rules are effectively changing Schelling points. And our role as a community is to create valuable Schelling points. Right? You want to have a set of rules that provide as much value as possible for different actors in the ecosystem. Because this is how we win. And there are two parts to that. Even though sometimes we look and it’s just one thing, but there are actually two things.
The first one is that we need to decide what is a valuable Schelling point. And I think we are pretty good at this. And this is why we have a lot of utility and we have a very strong fundamental development. We are very good at choosing what is a good Schelling point. We are very bad at actually creating it and making it strong.
So I’m going to talk about that.
How do you create a new Schelling point. For instance, there was a block size, and we wanted a new block size. So we need to create a new Schelling point. How do you create a new Schelling point that is very strong? You need a commitment strategy. That’s what it boils down to. And the typical example that is used when discussing Schelling points is nuclear warfare. So think about that a bit. You have two countries that both have nuclear weapons. And one country sends a nuke on the other country. Destroys some city, whatever, it’s bad. When you look at it from a purely rational perspective, you will assume that people are very angry, and that they want to retaliate, right? But if you put that aside, there is actually no benefit to retaliating. It’s not going to rebuild the city, it’s not going to make them money, it’s not going to give them resources to rebuild it, it’s not going to make new friends. Usually not. It’s just going to destroy some stuff in the other guy that would otherwise not change anything because the other guys already did the damage to us. So if you want nuclear warfare to actually prevent war like we’ve seen mostly happening in the past few decades with the mutually assured destruction theory, you need each of those countries to have a very credible commitment strategy, which is if you nuke me, I will nuke you, and I’m committing to that decision no matter what. I don’t care if it’s good or bad for me, if you nuke me, I will nuke you. And if you can commit to that strongly enough so that it’s credible for other people, it’s most likely that they are not going to nuke you in the first place because they don’t want to be nuked. And it’s capital to understand that this commitment strategy, it’s actually the most important part of it. It’s not the nuke, it’s not any of it, it’s the commitment strategy. You have the right commitment strategy, you can have all the nuke that you want, it’s completely useless, because you are not deterring anyone from attacking you.
There are many other examples, like private property. It’s something usually you’re going to be willing to put a little bit of effort to defend, and the effort is usually way higher than the value of the property itself. Because this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever, and you’re pretty committed to it, and therefore you create a Schelling point over the fact that this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever. People are willing to use violence and whatever to defend their property. This is effectively, even if you don’t do it yourself, this is what happens when you call the cops, right? The cops are like you stop violating that property or we’re going to use violence against you. So people are willing to use a very disproportionate response even in comparison to the value of the property. And this is what is creating the Schelling point that allows private property to exist.
This is the commitment strategy. And so the longest chain is a very simple example. You have miners and what miners do when they create a new block, essentially they move from one Schelling point when a bunch of people have some amount of money, to a new Schelling point where some money has moved, and we need to agree to the new Schelling point. And what they do is that they commit a certain amount of resources to it via proof of work. And this is how they get us to pay attention to the new Schelling point. And so UASF is also a very good example of that where people were like we activate segwit no matter what, like, if it doesn’t pan out, we just like busted our whole chain and we are dead.
Right? This is like the ultimate commitment strategy, as far as computer stuff is involved. It’s not like they actually died or anything, but as far as you can go in the computer space, this is very strong commitment strategy.
So let me take an example that is fairly inconsequential in its consequences, but I think explains very well. The initial BCH ticker was BCC. I don’t know if people remember that. Personally I remember reading about it. It was probably when we created it with Jonald and a few other people. And so I personally was for XBC, but I went with BCC, and most people wanted BCC right? It doesn’t matter. But it turned out that Bitfinex had some Ponzi scheme already listed as BCC. It was Bitconnect, if you remember. Carlos Matos, you know, great guy, but Bitconnect was not exactly the best stuff ever, it was a Ponzi scheme. And so as a result Bitifnex decided to list Bitcoin Cash as BCH instead of BCC, and then the ball started rolling and now everybody uses BCH instead of BCC.
So it’s not all that bad. The consequences are not that very bad. And I know that many of you are thinking that right now. Why is this guy bugging us about this? We don’t care if it’s BCC or BCH. And if you’re doing that, you are exactly proving my point.
Because … there are people working for Bitcoin.com here right? Yeah, so Bitcoin.com is launching an exchange, or just has launched, it’s either out right now or it’s going to be out very soon. Well think about that. Make this thought experiment for yourself. Imagine that Bitcoin.com lists some Ponzi scheme as BTC, and then they decide to list Bitcoin as BTN. What do you think would be the reaction of the Bitcoin Core supporter? Would they be like, you know what? we don’t want to be confused with some Ponzi scheme so we’re going to change everything for BTN. No, they would torch down Roger Ver even more than they do now, they would torch down Bitcoin.com. They would insult anyone that would suggest that this was a good idea to go there. They would say that everyone that uses the stuff that is BTC that it’s a ponzi scheme, and that it’s garbage, and that if you even talk about it you are the scum of the earth. Right? They would be extremely committed to whatever they have.
And I think this is a lesson that we need to learn from them. Because even though it’s a ticker, it’s not that important, it’s that attitude that you need to be committed to that stuff if you want to create a strong Schelling point, that allows them to have a strong Schelling point, and that does not allow us to have that strong of a Schelling point.
Okay, so yesterday we had the talk by Justin Bons from Cyber Capital, and one of the first things he said in his talk, is that his company has a very strong position in BCH. And so that changed the whole tone of the talk. You gotta take him seriously because his money is where his mouth is. You know that he is not coming on the stage and telling you random stuff that comes from his mind or tries to get you to do something that he doesn’t try himself. That doesn’t mean he’s right. Maybe he’s wrong, but if he’s wrong, he’s going bankrupt. And you know just for that reason, maybe it’s worth it to listen to it a bit more than some random person saying random stuff when they have no skin in the game.
And it makes him more of a leader in the space. Okay we have some perception in this space that we have a bunch of leaders, but many of them don’t have skin in the game. And it is very important that they do. So when there is some perceived weakness from BCH, if you act as an investor, you are going to diversify. If you act as a leader, you are going to fix that weakness. Right? And so, leaders, it’s not like you can come here and decide well, I’m a leader now. Leaders are leaders because people follow them. It seems fairly obvious, but … and you are the people following the leaders, and I am as well. We decide to follow the opinion of some people more than the opinion of others. And those are the defacto leaders of our community. And we need to make sure that those leaders that we have like Justin Bons, and make sure that they have a strong commitment to whatever they are leading you to, because otherwise you end up in this situation:

https://preview.redd.it/r23dptfobcl31.jpg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=750fbd0f1dc0122d2791accc59f45a235a522444
Where you got a leader, he’s getting you to go somewhere, he has some goal, he has some whatever. In this case he is not that happy with the British people. But he’s like give me freedom or give me death, and he’s going to fight the British, but at the same time he’s like you know what? Maybe this shit isn’t gonna pan out, you gotta make sure you have your backup plan together, you have your stash of British pound here. You know, many of us are going to die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.
That’s not the leader that you want.
I’m going to go to two more examples and then we’re going to be done with it. So one of them is Segwit 2x. Segwit 2x came with a time where some people wanted to do UASF. And UASF was essentially people that set up a modified version of their Bitcoin node that would activate segwit on August 1, no matter what. Right? No matter what miners do, no matter what other people do, it’s going to activate segwit. And either I’m going to be on the other fork, or I’m going to be alone and bust. Well, the alternative proposal was segwit 2x. Where people would activate segwit and then increase the size of the block. And what happened was that one of the sides had a very strong commitment strategy, and the other side, instead of choosing a proportional commitment strategy, what they did was that they modified the activation of segwit 2x to be compatible with UASF. And in doing so they both validate the commitment strategy done by the opposite side, and they weaken their own commitment strategy. So if you look at that, and you understand game theory a bit, you know what’s going to happen. Like the fight hasn’t even started and UASF has already won. And when I saw that happening, it was a very important development to me, because I have some experience in game theory, a lot of that, so I understood what was happening, and this is what led me to commit to BCH, which was BCC at the time, 100%. Because I knew segwit 2x was toast, even though it had not even started, because even though they had very strong cards, they are not playing their cards right, and if you don’t play your cards right, it doesn’t matter how strong your cards are.
Okay, the second one is emergent consensus. And the reason I wanted to put those two examples here is because I think those are the two main examples that lead to the fact that BTC have small blocks and we have big blocks and we’re a minority chain. Those are like the two biggest opportunities we had to have big blocks on BTC and we blew both of them for the exact same reason.
So emergent consensus is like an interesting technology that allows you to trade your bigger block without splitting the network. Essentially, if someone starts producing blocks that are bigger than … (video skips) ,,, The network seems to be following the chain that has larger blocks, eventually they’re going to fall back on that chain, and that’s a very clevery mechanism that allows you to make the consensus rules softer in a way, right? When everybody has the same consensus rules, it still remains enforced, but if a majority of people want to move to a new point, they can do so by bringing others with them without creating a fork. That is a very good activation mechanism for changing the block size, for instance, or it can be used to activate other stuff.
There is a problem, though. This mechanism isn’t able to set a new point. It’s a way to activate a new Schelling point when you have one, but it provides no way to decide when and where or to what value or to anything to where we are going. So this whole strategy lacks the commitment aspect of it. And because it lacks the commitment aspect of it, it was unable to activate properly. It was good, but it was not sufficient in itself. It needs to be combined with a commitment strategy. And especially on that one there are some researchers that wrote a whole paper (https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/686.pdf) unpacking the whole game theory that essentially come to that conclusion that it’s not going to set a new size limit because it lacked the commitment aspect of it. But they go on like they model all the mathematics of it, they give you all the numbers, the probability, and the different scenarios that are possible. It’s a very interesting paper. If you want to see, like, because I’m kind of explaining the game theory from a hundred mile perspective, but actually you can deep dive into it and if you want to know the details, they are in there. People are doing that. This is an actual branch of mathematics.
Alright, okay so conclusion. We must avoid to weaken our commitment strategy. And that means that we need to work in a way where first there is decentralization happening. Everybody has ideas, and we fight over them, we decide where we want to go, we put them on the roadmap, and once it’s on the roadmap, we need to commit to it. Because when people want to go like, ‘Oh this is decentralized’ and we do random stuff after that, we actually end up with decentralization, not decentralization in a cooperative manner, but like in an atomization manner. You get like all the atoms everywhere, we explode, we destroy ourself.
And we must require a leader to have skin in the game, so that we make sure we have good leaders. I have a little schema to explain that. We need to have negotiations between different parties, and because there are no bugs, the negotiation can last for a long time and be tumultuous and everything, and that’s fine, that’s what decentralization is looking like at that stage, and that’s great and that makes the system strong. But then once we made a decision, we got to commit to it to create a new Schelling point. Because if we don’t, the new Schelling point is very weak, and we get decentralization in the form of disintegration. And I think we have not been very good to balance the two. Essentially what I would like for us to do going forward is encouraging as much as possible decentralization in the first form. But consider people who participate in the second form, as hostile to BCH, because their behavior is damaging to whatever we are doing. And they are often gonna tell you why we can’t do that because it’s permissionless and decentralized, and they are right, this is permissionless and decentralized, and they can do that. We don’t have to take it seriously. We can show them the door. And not a single person can do that by themself, but as a group, we can develop a culture where it’s the norm to do that. And we have to do that.”
submitted by BCHcain to btc [link] [comments]

Bitconnect Lawsuit Has Begun!! Craig Grant/Trevon James/Crypto Nick SERVED to go to court! OUCH

So the time is here.. Attorney General National Security Division has served the Bitconnect shillers and court date is right around the corner.. Wonder how this will go?
Trevon James Court Date!
Craig Grant Court Date!
WHATTTAMMIGUNNAHHDOOOOOO!
submitted by CryptoMstrmnd to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Pessoas que caíram em golpe Genbit que prometia 15% de rendimento a.m. por investimento e foram pagas em moeda fictícia - Sócios da Genbit somem com o dinheiro - O que fazer?

Tenho conhecidos que caíram no seguinte golpe junto com milhares de outras pessoas que podem achar este post útil quando encontrarem.
Uma empresa chamada Zero10 oferecia cotas de investimento em Bitcoin prometendo retorno a de 10 a 15% a.m. A CVM proibiu a atuação da empresa que então o fundador Nivaldo Gonzaga dos Santos e seu filho Gabriel Tomaz Barbosa fundaram uma nova empresa chama Genbit que continuou a oferecer rendimentos de mais que 10% a.m. no pacote de vantagens. Um Coach de Valinhos chamado Robson Martins ajudava a promover o esquema entre seus seguidores (off - nada melhor que um Coach pra fazer as pessoas acreditarem em coisas impossíveis, né?).
O esquema é altamente suspeito de ser um Esquema Ponzi. A CVM também proibiu a atuação de Genbit. E uma hora começou a desmoronar tudo.
A Genbit sem dinheiro para pagar os investidores desde o segundo semestre do ano passado decidiu pagar os investidores numa moeda fictícia* chamada TPK (Treeptoken). O grupo Treepart (que é a holding da Genbit) criou uma empresa no papel na Estônia para ser dona dos TPK. A Estônia tem vários problemas de falta regulamentação de criptomoeda.
Algumas pessoas criaram um grupo no FB para negociar as coisas em TPK, muitas dizem acreditar que o TPK vai valorizar como o Bitcoin e acham que o mercado vai adotar em massa. Também está tendo muita especulação, como que "milhares de estabelecimentos estão aceitando" ou mesmo que o Nivaldo teria dito que eles estão em parceria com a BMW.
Problema maior. Alguns que entraram na justiça conseguiram que a justiça fosse bloquear as contas da Genbit para pagar os lesados mas encontrou pouquíssimo dinheiro. Talvez esteja tudo perdido pra sempre?
A Globo fez uma reportagem sobre o caso. O advogado da Genbit diz que o contrato era de investimentos em "ativos digitais", então não era dever da empresa garantir pagamentos em reais.
O Ministério Público pediu um bloqueio nas contas da empresa. Num grupo do pessoal que negocia os TPK para tentar contornar o prejuízo negociando a moeda, um certo usuário veio incentivar as pessoas a dizer para o MP que não foram lesadas afim de tentar livrar a cara da empresa com a seguinte mensagem:
Pessoal bom dia!
Outro ponto que foi falado muito ontem foi sobre a MP e que nós podemos ajudar a empresa e nós mesmos formalizando em uma carta de próprio punho que não tivemos prejuízos materiais com a empresa.
Vejam, liberdade e desejo de cada um, isso não é uma obrigação ou implica em problemas. Eu tomei de decisão de ajudar, pois é o meu, ou melhor, o nosso patrimonio que está em jogo, mas fica a critério de cada um.
A carta (de próprio punho) deve conter:
Eu Fulano de Tal brasileiro, portador do RG xx.xxx.xxx-x, declaro para os devidos fins que sou associado da Genbit desde MES/ANO e não sofri prejuízo de natureza material ou financeira da referida empresa.
CIDADE, DIA - MES - ANO
ASSINATURA
A carta pode ser digitalizada ou até fotografada e enviada para o email [EMAIL DO CARA]
Abs a todos!
A justificativa para a iniciativa seria que, ajudando a empresa os TPK iriam ter sucesso e todos sairiam ganhando.
*Digo fictícia pois não está auditável nem é claro se existe mesmo alguma blockchain. Existem posts no FB de pessoas que dizem que a Genbit é só um site que não tem nada.
submitted by rickccb to ConselhosLegais [link] [comments]

The LIES of Chris Rabalais and AllSportsMarket

https://i.imgur.com/oucavJo.jpg
A) This is a work in progress. (trying to make this neater and add things that people post) These things have been collected from forums / posts in various places (official forums, reddit groups etc)..and are here to be sifted through and examined to see which are true and which are not. Anyone is welcome to comment both agreement or disagreement.
B) ANY CORRECTIONS please send a message and reference the lie number *** I want to remove false info ASAP*** Or make a post in this thread. If there is anything in this list that shouldn't be here, it will be removed.
C) If you'd like me to add a lie, PLEASE make a post in this thread! Include something like ADD THIS LIE and make a short description
d) ASM /Allsportsmarket / the company means any or all of the proxies and identities of CWH , NSEI, Sportshares.net etc
------------------------------------
A while back, Chris claimed people on reddit were "lying" and that he would respond "point by point" to any "lies" told by redditors. I have begun to compile a list of all of Chris' lies from various sources.

To Chris Rabalais / Allsportsmarket.com : You are more than welcome to respond "point by point". Please include a lie number...and respond and explain how it isn't a lie....

---

Lies of Chris Rabalais

1)This is and was an investment
He has always claimed this was an investment, and still does. He claims you will get a return...yet from the other side of his mouth, he makes sure to mention that this is a "donation." Not one of us would have donated to him without the chance of a return / profit. None of us. This was a donation....to Chris Rabalais...NOT an investment. Still to this day when askign for money he makes suree to put in DONATION but then out of the other side of his mouth he claims you will get a return..or profit..and says you are an investor / insider etc.....This is NOT an investment. This is a DONATION to a very inefficient "charity" claiming you will someday see a "return" on it.
2) Investors into ASM would get a return on their investment -- profit from it
He is still promising people a return...many people show a 'profit' on their account statement but are unable to cash out. Unable to withdraw etc...Chances are, If you have made a "profit" from this on paper, you cannot withdraw it.
3) He was in the process of registering the company shares with the SEC
The SEC has stated point blank he has taken NO STEPS to register the company shares. It is in the complaint.
4) The company shares were ABOUT to be registered, and once they did...they would have even more value and we would miss out unless we bought in
Not only did he say it was in process, he claimed many times they were very close to getting the shares registered and when they did, they would have more value..and investors would be sorry if we didn't jump in on this "rocketship".
5) Chris knows how to get the shares registered with the SEC or has any clue what he is doing in terms of registering the shares
According to the SEC , Chris Rabalais has no idea HOW to even get the shares registered...and that is in their complaint as well. Meanwhile for years Chris was claiming he knew what do do to get the shares registered.
6) "This may be the last chance to jump on this great opportunity"
How many times have we all heard this lie? This or that program is ending....you'll never get another chance at giving money to Chris Rabalais again...but then shockingly...there's another even better offer in a couple days/weeks...
7) If you don't give X amount of money right now , the lights might suddenly go out on ASM..and you'll lose your "investment"
Another lie they tell is that if you don't give money, they will go out of business and you will "lose your investment". Bullcrap , they're not shutting off their free money machine....until someone MAKES them. Oh and you have no investment. Two lies for the price of one.
8) This is not a ponzi scheme
Chris has addressed the ponzi issue only VERY briefly over the years. He recently claimed it isn't a ponzi because the "last guy in can still make money" but that would require MONEY coming in from others...so he gets around the truth by omitting that its not the "guy" its the "last money in " which is nearly the same thing... the people who put their money in last will lose....that is a ponzi. The Judge in the Seth Leon case said so...and I hope another judge says so soon. (See here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/e61nya/summary_of_the_seth_leon_case_with_update/ )
9) The sports shares have value
Chris claims they have value because they area "claim on future dividends" which is a lie. That is not any definition of real or intrinsic value...and even if it was (it isn't, IMO) the claim on future dividends is a LIE because every penny of that future dividend money relies on new money coming into the market...which is a ponzi...which is valueless
10) You would be able to cash out (sell your holdings, pay off your bonus margin and keep your profits)
He changed the rules when the market started imploding. For years he promised investors they could sell their shares, pay off our margin and take our profits. No one would've bought in if they thought they could never do this. Even after he froze people's ability to cash out...he kept claiming that we would be able to soon...and urged people to buy more margin because all of the profits would be able to be kept.
11) Chris would stop selling margin
Recently, there was a conference call where key members of the team called for an end to the margin offers..NOT because they were a scam (they are) but because it was no longer possible to ignore the implosion of the pilot market and the collapse was being blamed on margin....Chris agreed to end margin and made announcements to this end. In a short time, he realized that promising people money on margin profit was his only revenue...so he HAD to start selling margin again...He knows it is worthless, promised to stop selling it....and lied.
12) Different celebrities, politicians, business people were about to come on board and help us
XFL (paul has contacts with them!!), PHIL COLLINS' WIFE!, Mark Cuban, Jon Bon FUCKING Jovi, Roger Goddell, Snoop Dogg, Brian Austin Green, Trump (speaker at zero club), Labron James, meetings with MLB people, Jack MA / Alibaba.......god knows how many other names this guy drops as potential people who are going to help or who we are 'reaching out' to in order to get them to help us. (help me add to this list)
13) ASM would have a "liquidity event" and be able to make money off of our company shares
There was going to be some liquidity event where we could sell our company shares to other investors...of course it never happened.
14) The new york times ad was going to be about ASM or helping our investment
There was NO MENTION of ASM or AllSportsMarket in the new york times ad and it didn't do a single thing to help ASM become a legitimate company. The only thing it did (from memory) was bash gambling.
15) The trips to Israel, funded by the investors, were something worthy of doing with the money...
Chris bragged and posted pictures of his trips to Israel...but what did they have to do with ASM? How was spending "donations" (investments) for him to go to Israel supposed to help the company? Clearly this was a waste.
16) the Hero club events he goes to (more travel) help ASM in any way whatsoever
I have never seen any evidence that spending who knows how much of the investors' money has been wasted on this,yet chris continues to act as if his membership in the Hero Club is a wise way to spend money...I have seen no evidence that the Hero club has done anything bust waste money.
17) donating to ASM is helping anyone or doing anything other than putting money in HIS pocket...
Quite simply, Chris "donates" 10% of the money given him, if we are to believe that. So He has given (according to him) 150k+ to a hunger charity. They have (according to Chris) matched this 7x, so the 150k donation has turned into a millionish dollars worth of charity. Sounds good right? Well in doing so, Chris has just wasted 90% of the money. Instead of 150k, had we all simply given our 1.5 million to this same charity....and they matched it 7x...we would have turned our money into 10+ million dollars for charity. So essentially, even by Chris' own numbers...we have wasted 9 million dollars of potential charity....by paying Chris's rent..cars etc.. all so that he can take 90% and give 10% to charity....to me, this is wasteful and we would be better donationg directly to the 7x charity the entire 100% rather than wasting the 90%.
18) The ASM 'real market' was a real money market
Chris started the real market to fool us into thinking it was actual money. He later then changed the name to "pilot market" after taking people's REAL money..so he could have the excuse "HEY this is a PILOT market!!!" when you cant withdraw...otherwise why call this a "real" market then suddenly change the name to "pilot"?
19) the ASM pilot market was going to transition with your holdings to a 'regulated' or 'exempt market' and you would be able to keep your profit from the pilot market
So it has been promised to us that the pilot (which was the real market) market will transition to another market..where.....where you'll STILL be able to keep your profits...so..guys..KEEP BUYING BONUS MARGIN lol....
20) If there is a good enough plan, Chris will happily step down in January 2020 and let someone else change the direction of the "company"
Chris claims "give him till December" and if no one is happy he will step aside if that's what everyone wants...IF there is a plan he likes..LOL..we will see...but I am guessing he will not.
21) The pilot market is working
He has claimed the pilot market is working and proves that ASM is functional...yet the market has collapsed and he has frozen everyone's accounts from withdrawing..or paying off margin..etc...but the real/pilot market has been a disaster. Here is him contradicting himself and admitting that the pilot market does NOT work : https://vocaroo.com/bsbcnHWDF8z . This is an admission thatthe pilot market as it is now is busted and will never work without being completely re-designed (revenue sharing etc). The worst part of this is he KNOWS the pilot market is not working yet he is still selling margin to buy stocks on this market.....that to me is criminal. How can he do this?
22) The learning market is working and proves that the math and numbers are correct and functional
Claims have been made the learning market is working..LOL...anyone who has touched the learning market knows it is completely dysfunctional...and not any kind of advertisement or positive experience...
23) Bonus margin has some sort of value other than to put money in his pocket
He claims bonus margin has value. It doesn't. Its worthless. If he tries to deny this..ask him why he is selling it if it has no value? Ask him how he plans on turning something with 0 value into something with value. This is the core of his scam right now..selling WORTHLESS bonus margin with no value for real money...which he donates 10% of and the rest goes to expenses...and his salary & rent etc...
24) Chris "had alper" double check the math in 2009 , and the market math is fine..
Oh god...so in one of the videos, Chris claims he had Alper check the math in 2009 and alper told him the numbers work. This is such utter horseshit, and mainly designed to deflect responsibility for the failure of the market..so he can blame it on Alper. Chris knows the math doesn't work. Alper knows the math doesn't work..and Alper & Chris know that margin is worthless...and they know the market is a failure...they have to know this...
25) special clubs like "ASM Black", "Insider programs", "Advisory Councils" etc etc are anything other than him trying to get even more money out of your pocket
All of these programs are just designed to get you to give them more money..there is no real benefit to being a member in them. The insider program just basically stopped people from being able to withdraw sooner....who knows what ASM black was..and this advisory council...what was that? Give Chris 100$ to listen to more youtube rants? Ok...whatever new club or council they will come up with next is a bunch of crap designed to make you feel special as you give them your hard earned money.
26) The NDA he sent via email before spamming you with more ads is legally binding
We all know the NDA he sent via e-mail was worthless..it was hilarious.....and unenforceable....
27) They would provide investors with financial documents / audit / detailed information at the end of October 2019
Yeah so will we ever get to see the "audit" ? Doubt it...they are not transparent with any pertinent info. Who is paid what? Who holds what shares? What shares have been granted to who? What money was paid by NSEI to who , and for what? "Seal of transparency" my ass.
28) The SEC filing suit against him could be viewed as a positive in some ways
I forget how he worded it but he basically claimed the SEC suit was some sort of opportunity for something positive for him. The one positive thing I can think of is it stopped him from getting more money from suckers...
29) He didn't "really" lose the case against Seth Leon
He made all kinds of excuses and claims the only reason he lost against Seth Leon is because Seth Leon sent the papers to an old address....LOL (see here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/e61nya/summary_of_the_seth_leon_case_with_update/ ) Make NO mistake..Chris LOST the case. The court found "AMPLE EVIDENCE" of fraud by Chris Rabalais.
30) It was Trump's fault (Govt shutdown) that he didn't get paperwork done with the SEC
LOL...I hope this is what he tells the Judge
31) It was Jason's fault that "a letter" wasn't sent to the SEC regarding the NRHL
Blame it on a guy who doesn't work for the company any more...
32) It is alper's fault the math/numbers don't work because Chris asked alper to "check the numbers" in 2009
Blame this on Alper.....when he has known for YEARS the numbers do not work
33) there were "saboteurs" who tried to wreck the "deal" with NRHL, who came from reddit..*but luckily they saved the deal!
Remember the saboteurs? remember how they "saved" the deal with the NRHL? Remember how the NRHL was going to be huge for ASM? Yeah none of these things were true....MAYBE a guy (gregson?) tried to contact the NRHL to find out if they were even real.. but NO ONE thought the NRHL was going to be a good thing..and NO ONE wanted to transition their money to a market led by roller derby..because it was and is a stupid idea.
34) There were lawyers (zero club? friends?) who were going to help with the SEC defense for free
Chris had an army of lawyers, some of the best in the country and who had never lost...but yet he had to beg the court for a free lawyer because he can't get a lawyer to represent him...LOL
35) "secured by blockchain" - Chris claims this tech is in use now but what is it exactly other than bullshit?
On one of his latest videos he claims the blockchain technology is protecting the ASM market right now...BS. There is no technology that I have seen. There hasn't been anything said about what this even is or does. Ace hasn't even been heard from since around August has he? They can't even get an android app...the blockchain bullshit is just more jargon and buzzwords...trying to get you to give them money...there is nothing behind this "secured by blockchain" trademark...other than words...otherwise why not explain exactly what it is, and how it works ..etc...
36) Chris is going to counter sue the SEC and prove that he is a legitimate business
LOL.. with his free lawyer?
37) All cryptocurrencies are a SCAM
Notice he screams and cries FRAUD at many things, but he is a fraud himself. Typical tactic...accuse others of what you are doing. Also, there is some real value in some cryptos, like bitcoin...unlike a sports share on ASM. Its called 'proof of work' ...that has real value that can even be measured..by electricity use, processing power etc...I am not arguing it has a lot of value, or even that it is as valuable as the price....but it is above zero, unlike a share in a sports team on ASM. I'm also not an expert nor to I condone investing in crypto...
38) Gambling is more of a problem than ASM / NSEI
Again, he screams and cries about how dirty Gambling is...but at least legal gambling is regulated, and you have a chance to win. Unlike ASM...
39) They were working on an Android app , and needed donations for it
One of the reasons I donated early on was because of seeing the IOS app, and the promises of making an android app.In fairness this might not have been a lie....but if theyre not going to make an android app , then say so.
41) They lied by omission and did not tell investors about the SEC suit until August 2019
So someone else came and announced the SEC lawsuit on the reddit forum in August 2019. There is some strong evidence that Chris knew about this in April 2019 or even earlier like maybe Oct 2018...and if he knew about it before it was announced , then he witheld this information from all of us..
42) The NFL / MLS "Deals"
We very nearly had a deal with the NFL and MLS...or have / had a chance to make deals with them...its all bullshit. The guy cant even make a deal with roller derby leagues...and we are expected to believe he is making deals with major leagues?
43) Wefunder / Crowd Funding
We started the process to sell shares through we-funder....but they turned us down. Guess what Chris "forgot" to tell us all? THE REASON they turned us down...because ASM / CWH doesn't pass the "smell test"? What was the reason? It seems like maybe the reason was the UNREGISTERED SECURITIES? I mean there had to be a reason..what was it?
44) Share Buyback
They were going to buy back company shares from investors....and at times stated the shares were so valuable they would gladly buy them back for X amount because they were sure to go up in price...but when push comes to shove they NEVER will buy this worthless junk back......even for 1 penny. A lot of the 'tyes men' have stated they would also buy shares back from unhappy investors but of course they never do this in reality.
45) Telling the truth, even if it is harmful to Chris / ASM is some type of Slander or Libel
Chris would like you to think that calling him out on fraud and lies is some type of "libel" or "slander" but as anyone knows...telling the truth is not slander or libel. He is trying to scare people from telling the truth. Blowing the whistle on his fraud is NOT slander or libel. Period. He is the CEO of a company that he sold shares of stock in, fraudulently. He must and will be held accountable.
46) The market cap number is a legitimate indicator of the validity of ASM
Chris love to throw around market capitalization numbers (4 Billion LOL) as if they mean anything at all or indicate that this market is healthy. They include the learning market (fake money) and the margin (also fake money). If you subtract the learning market, the bonus margin, and the money "used" by chris for data, rent, cars etc...you have pretty much zero market cap in reality.
47) ASM has a way of checking if an investor is accredited: See here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/eacs69/new_lies_regarding_searching_for_for_accredited/ . In my understanding , one of the ways (in some cases) un-registered securities can be sold is if it is to an "accredited" investor. The SEC has said Chris has no means of checking this. I would personally believe the SEC at this point....and I will count this as a lie until it is proven that Chris / ASM actually does have a way of legitimately checking accreditation.
48) The reason Chris withheld the fact the SEC was investigating him and suing him was because the SEC told him he couldnt tell us.
BULLSHIT. In the audio Chris makes absurd claims that he couldnt tell "investors" of his problems with the SEC because they told him not to talk about it. Yet meanwhile he kept taking money from investors as if everything was fine..KNOWING that trouble was brewing and KNOWING that the shit was going to hit the fan. Show me a letter by the SEC that says he can't warn his investors of an impending action by them SHOW IT TO US. If you show this to us, I'll remove this lie. It doesnt make any sense because the SEC exists to protect us from predators like Chris , so why would they tell him he cannot warn us of problems with the SEC????? MAKES ZERO SENSE. Does not pass the smell test. This is a lie by omission..taking our money , pretending things are fine....but KNOWING problems are coming. The bottom line: Chris didnt say SHIT about this anywhere that I know of until AFTER it was posted publicly that the lawsuit was filed...I heard about this online before it was ever mentioned by chris in any conference call or statement by him.
49) Not sure if this is technically a "lie" or not but the guy / ASM has at least 10 twitter accounts...here are a few of them: 1) https://twitter.com/AllSportsMarket 2) https://twitter.com/rabalais_cva 3) https://twitter.com/asmclients 4) https://twitter.com/thesportsvote 5) https://twitter.com/SportsFolios 6) https://twitter.com/MySportsWiki 7) https://twitter.com/chrisrabalais 8) https://twitter.com/NuSportsEconomy 9) https://twitter.com/ASMFreeApp 10) https://twitter.com/ASM_Advisor (not 100% on this one but it looks fake) ..etc..... It looks as if this one: https://twitter.com/ASMFreeApp has a bunch of bots or paid 'farm' followers. So, while not a 'lie' exactly...very odd and shady behavior.
50) In the "Investors Q& A" found here: https://tinyurl.com/spbznmf They failed to disclose the Seth Leon case, the failed attempt at bankruptcy discharge of the fraud debt, and failed to disclose the debt owed to Seth Leon. So they lied in the sections about Legal Problems and they Lied in the sections about Debt. This is in a Q&A involving potential ionvestors so they are lying to potential investors about the risks.

51) Chris will "fact check" and respond to every accusation made against him and prove that these things are lies told by "known liars"
https://i.imgur.com/HaGfekN.jpg
So a couple of weeks ago, Chris said he would fact check all of the "lies" told about him...so I thought I would do him a big favor and make a huge list. His claim was that everyone saying all of these things are "known liars" and none of these things is true. He says they are all bogus "claims" made by "liars." He said he would refute these"claims." Well guess what asshole? Every songle person reading this is probably a victim of yours, and they KNOW all of these things aren't "claims" ... they are facts. I have done my best here to stick to things that are universal..that we have all witnessed as investors.
Now (shockingly) chris refuses to "fact check" any of these "lies." He says he will respond only if you sign your name and send him a private e-mail or make a post on his censored and controlled website where he has to approve any post before it is seen by the public... So I will add this as yet another lie. He will never refute SHIT. He is a thief and a liar. and a con man....and CAN"T refute anything said above. Period. More than likely if anyone posted this list on his forums, he would NEVER allow it to stand....so how is anyone supposed to get this list "fact checked"? The only Known liar here..well..I think we all know who that is...
You would think he might want to address these things publicly instead of making people ask via e-mail and leaving a cloud of suspicion for potential investors to see..and maybe he would rather answer one time,rather than a bunch of separate e-mails......but I guess when there are literally no answers to any of these things, the only solution is to try and hide it more...
submitted by 707NorCaL707 to ASMEunfiltered [link] [comments]

04-25 01:14 - 'The cognitive dissonance is extraordinary. / There is no amount of evidence, logic, train of thought, proof, or argument that could ever be enough to convince 99.9% of Bitcoiners that it's a scam. / I'm too old, I don't u...' by /u/acesdeuces155 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 17-27min

'''
The cognitive dissonance is extraordinary.
There is no amount of evidence, logic, train of thought, proof, or argument that could ever be enough to convince 99.9% of Bitcoiners that it's a scam.
I'm too old, I don't understand the technology, it's based on math and math is immutable, it's the best performing asset of the last decade. It's the same arguments over and over again.
It bothers me when I'm told I don't understand how it works... Because I do. I used to spend a few hours a day staring at charts. I watched every YouTube a couple of people made. I started buying Bitcoin when it was $550. Hell I was even telling people to buy Ethereum when it was still $7.
Poloniex robbed me. But it took for that to happen for my eyes to open to reality.
The thing that gets me the most is I know the overwhelming majority of Bitcoiners aren't stupid. The pull of future wealth is so strong that it's literally blinding otherwise intelligent people.
I'm not saying it won't go higher. It could.
But it doesn't matter. For the majority of people the gains will be on paper only. Your portfolio isn't worth anything until it's liquid, a fact most of you are overlooking.
Let me try putting it like this :
Do you know why some people make these outrageous $100k price predictions? Two reasons:
  1. To convince you to HODL. The more Bitcoin you own now the more you stand to make in the future, right? So why sell at all?
  2. To convince you to buy more. For the person who makes the $100k prediction to cash out it requires you to bring new liquidity into the market.
As you're bringing new money into the market the person who made the $100k prediction is cashing out behind your back.
I know it's not what you want to hear, but that's how a ponzi scheme works.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: acesdeuces155
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

The Problem All Y'all Have With Elon Musk is He is a Tech Dork Like All Y'all

But he's like the Uber Dork.
Your reality is all virtual, but his reality is real.
You race fast cars and launch rockets and shtup movie stars and trade in Bitcoin Ponzi schemes on screen in your windowless cubicles.
He does all these things in the real world.
He makes fast electric cars and actually launches rockets and shtups movie stars and creates real billions with actual value behind them.
Musk is your ego-fantasy played out in real time and it drives you loco.
Which is why you snipe at him impotently on Reddit.
He's doing it.
You're not.
Eat your hearts out, MF!!!!
submitted by MuskUberAlles to EnoughMuskSpam [link] [comments]

Is Bitcoin a Ponzi Scheme  Is Bitcoin a Bubble Rickards: ‘Bitcoin is a Ponzi Scheme’ - YouTube Why Bitcoin Is a Ponzi Scheme with David Heinemeier Hansson Is Bitcoin a Ponzi Scheme? ELDERHASH - The Latest Bitcoin Ponzi Scheme To Stay Away From

As Bitcoinist reported on December 20, 2017, Litecoin founder Charlie Lee “sold or donated” his entire Litecoin wealth to avoid “conflicts of interest” arising from its growth. Interestingly, Lee sold the very top of Litecoin’s unprecedented pump — something which TruthNeverTold views as an obvious profit-taking exit from a nothing-for-something Ponzi scheme. In mid-May, news.Bitcoin.com reported on one of our mining pool videos being censored and banned from the video-sharing platform Youtube. The report had shown how Youtube has been censoring videos ... The giveaway scam uses the identities of celebrities like Elon Musk or a well known exchange to lure people into sending their bitcoin, with help from Youtube advertising. Such schemes can net ... BLOCKTV’s Yonah Hochhauser reports on the PlusToken Ponzi Scheme, and how their offloading of funds is crashing the crypto market. ————– For more fi… Later it dumped over 200K Bitcoin selling them Over The Counter(OTC) which was assumed to be one of the reasons for bitcoin price fall earlier this year during the March 2020 dump ... As the price of bitcoin continues to tumble, the finger of blame is being pointed everywhere from South Korea, to shills accused of promoting cryptocurrency "Ponzi schemes" for personal gain.

[index] [14994] [22967] [15204] [27614] [28558] [548] [15275] [26428] [7459] [25201]

Is Bitcoin a Ponzi Scheme Is Bitcoin a Bubble

Bitcoin has been in existence for all of eight years but a debate is raging in the investing community: Is the cryptocurrency actually useful beyond just bei... The only industry Bitcoin has disrupted is the ponzi scheme industry. [ 40:50 ] Questions why people want a currency so detached from the real world. [ 41:12 ] People who use Bitcoin want the ... Why Bitcoin Is a Ponzi Scheme with David Heinemeier Hansson - Duration: 52:52. Make More Marbles Recommended for you. 52:52. The $65-Billion Ponzi scheme, ... Is Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme? Let's break down what a Ponzi scheme actually is and compare that to bitcoin. It seems like everytime one Bitcoin Ponzi scheme scams away with their investor's money, another one pops up in its place. It's literally like playing a game of Whack-A-Mole. Elderhash follows the ...

#