Jump to content

jag216

Bronze Member
  • Posts

    921
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About jag216

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

jag216's Achievements

  1. I also found myself strangely comfortable looking at the BTC chart. I think after watching BCBacker I was expecting the market to be a bit more jumpy, but it seems like we are just ranging now - someone needs to buy some time for some reason? LOL. I know I have been rebalancing a little and also looking to see if if I can trade up anything laterally against BTC to something with better utility.
  2. My observation is that we are shifting slowly from a bipolar space to a tripolar space: 1) BTC OG store of value crowd - deflationary, no staking, no contracts 2) ETH OG staking crowd - some deflationary, some inflationary, contracts, swaps, lots of tokenization and derivative options 3) DeFi running crowd - Decentralized finance is reaching into several neat pots - decentralized storage and access, decentralize identity provision, decentralized loans and derivative contracts and exchanges. There are a number of coins associated with each and they appear to be slowly shifting the bipolar rotation, I think this bull market could see some multiplier effects as a result, due to this third hedge. A lot of classic correlations and inverse relationships are breaking down. One token that I have mentioned on here before is Solana (SOL), which I thought would fall into group 2, but actually appears to be closer to group 3. I would put HBAR, HOT and SOL in that category, as well as some of their kissing cousins like Arweave $AR which Solana uses for persistent permanent archival ledger storage. Solana was much cheaper when I got in, but if you look at the charts and their technical progress they have been my darkhorse hold for a few reasons - the tech stack is proven in a number of key achievements, including their high level 1 throughput without the need for level 2 scaling solutions/sharding, developer appreciation and one of the largest successful crosschain account migrations in crypto history (moving Kin from Stellar to the Solana blockchain). solana.com Circle added USDC on the Solana chain. As of now corporate entities are just getting familiar with Solana and its potential, and they keep improving their tech stack with every ambitious project. Very talented dev team. Its chart looks like early ETH, and during market cycles over the past 6 months is that reliably held an inverse relationship to BTC and ETH in ways that have made it an exceptional hedge. There are days when everything has been in red in my portfolio and SOL has gone up, and its pullbacks when BTC and ETH pump are less than its growth. ARweave ($AR) (which I couldn't find a way to buy here in the US when I first got into it) has gone up quickly and is a direct storage-to-value utility token - for permanent censorship-free storage and the capacity to mine through Proof-of-Storage consensus. Unlike many other more speculative tokens, ARweave seems to be heavily driven by usage and fundamentals. It has a similar curve to early BNB, but I believe it pretty clearly a utility token. Who knows. arweave.org
  3. I was really saddened by this, because it seems like both an attack on crypto and censorship resistance, which is going to be a bigger issue down the line as privacy vs national security becomes the hot button topic for the decade. Already people are being forced to have their privacy rights violated through the use of medical passports - where the government and private businesses can suddenly force you to disclose personal health information in order to gain access to national and private services. This is a terrible precedent to allow for, and it is opening the door wide open for insurance companies and employers to enter into cahoots - which is already a nasty mess. There are many employers who simply won't hire a person because their age and/or likelihood of impending healthcare costs that they will need to absorb. It's illegal of course, and they'll never admit the reason of course, but it is getting reported on Blind and private discords. Our privacy is under attack. Combine that with our freedom of speech and to hold assembly and you have a totalitarian's wet dream.
  4. God I hate Twitter. I can't say I rotated out of XRP. I can say that when I posted projects of interest in alt coin forums, I tended to buy them. I also did have enough scraped together to get into a few decent buys - not as much as I'd like now of course, but enough to not feel like the bull run left the station without me. My only regret so far was selling out 2mil HOT at $0.001 with the hope of being able to buy back in later - it did nothing for months and months. Then $0.007. Dammit, make that $0.008 - grr. I still don't understand why BNB and BTR and these other exchange tokens are not getting targeted by the SEC. I did the initial ICO for DTR (the utility token for the tokens.net exchange put together by former bitstamp founder) but once I realized I couldn't participate on the platform or exercise any rights as a US token holder I ditched them. NEXO at least registered properly and that gave me more confidence in their platform, though you still can't do certain things with NEXO tokens as a US citizen (you can't earn your crypto interest in NEXO, for example) I didn't get into BNB even though I could have - it came out around the same time as DTR and near the same price point I think? But I figured it was going to be knocked out as a security right off the bat - yet here we are hundred and hundreds of dollars up. https://usethebitcoin.com/is-binance-coin-bnb-a-utility-token-or-a-security/
  5. My suspicion is that this is actually the process that has been pursued for years, and is probably already done - but it is sitting on the shelf waiting for the SEC to collect on this new direction. It would not surprise me to find that this clarity is being held up until the SEC collects on penalties.
  6. Oh yeah? Well *I* voted for Kotos. Crypto logos are often terrible. That seems to be what make them unique and recognizable. I mean the Ethereum logo is a rip off of The Sims for crying out loud.
  7. And a fun followup, because I am a KIN holder from early on and never sold... Kin has successfully migrated the vast majority of accounts of significance over to the Solana network as SPL tokens. Ledger just approved the final KIN (SPL) application and it works fine. Kin is pushing forward and looking to get relisted on exchanges now that ledger custody support for the token is rolling out. Their reasoning for the shift was that Stellar's settlement time of 7-10 seconds had become a performance bottleneck for their application ecosystem. I don't think I need to tell you that this is going to draw attention to both Kin and Solana (which uses a validation protocol called Proof of History based on universal timecodes and some other tech that seems to be derived from cell tower technology). The funny thing about Solana is that they focused so heavily on transaction throughput (50k/sec) that they dropped the ball a little bit on wallet address allocation and garbage collection which ended up slowing things down during the migration of 55 million Kin accounts. But as a result of the migration they have improved efficiency on that front and at the moment transactions are speeding along nicely and clean-up jobs are as well (when an account has no balance, I believe the wallet disappears unless rent is present - I have only observed this in their staking wallet architecture). Kin enthusiasts are heavily marketing the fact that they are one of a handful of cleared tokens - no doubt trying to get some ground before Ripple settles.
  8. This is really important. During the March crash a number of people got wiped out completely - even though I knew what the risks were, I had not considered the value of stablecoins at the time. As a result, the oracle at Nexo did liquidate a good portion of my collateral. They did recognize the issue was extreme and provided a reasonable and ethical solution, but at the most recent SEC dip... Well I will say that I got lucky. I woke up at around 2:30 am and happened to see Crypto Eri's video about Brad's message warning that an SEC suit was likely. Having got into this situation with KIN and watched it drop to the floor, I quickly deleveraged on Nexo and got myself out at around $0.47 - BUT Others were not as lucky. Once the offocial word dropped, Nexo halted the ability for people to repay their loans in XRP - but they did not halt their oracles which proceeded to liquidate their XRP collateral at around $0.21 and many people saw 90-95% dropps in collateral. Millions of XRP. Now then, my experience with Nexo has been positive, but this situation concerned me a lot. In these extreme circumstances they have been know to reinstate people's leverage positions via their OTC and I know that for some people they have offered OTC options in the future should you get the capital to buy back in on a limited basis. However while the XRP lawsuit is in effect it seems that a number of companies are deciding that jurisdictions be damned, they are halting trading for everyone which is, in my opinion, a calculated and unnecessary move that is really all about spooking people out of the asset. I got lucky in that I happened to wake up early and get my affairs in order prior to everything else going. But folks should take Pablo's advice regarding leverage very seriously. It's a bit of a gamble, and it's not your house.
  9. I have thought a lot about this whole 'who owns the forest' idea behind all of these projects and their 'founders' reserve' and whatnot... Here' is the issue I keep running into - a question I find hard to crack in terms of the SEC's approach: The SEC seems to have no alternative methods to build markets without enlisting the services of market makers. If Ripple gave it away for free, SOMEONE - maybe not Ripple - would throw a commercial layer on top of the distribution of that asset just to see if the technology beneath it served a purpose that other people found to be worth paying for. Bitcoin used to be worth squat. It was worth what you were willing to give up for it. There was a small cadre of electronics shops and whatnot that were willing to trade real goods for magical money. How this got to be $30,000+ was the immutability of the blockchain recordkeeping system, and the ability to trade an object of value without a trusted third party. As time moved on, this open source money began gaining in value. You used to be able to get a Wikispeed roadster for 25,000 BTC. But that was due to the utility people found in having a monetary network that they could manage and control without intermediaries. Ripple tried to advance the organic process and prime the pump, and unfortunately we had this previous example of Bitcoin suggesting that hey, people could believe in this monetary network enough to make the token worth something! If there was no BTC, if XRP was the first out of the gate, would anyone have ever believed the token would be worth something one day, even with the team at Ripple behind it? I don't believe that there would have been any expectation of massive profits from owning XRP without the success of BTC foreshadowing and cultivating expectations about the ability of a digital asset on a network accumulating value in price. How, when the use of a currency is essential to the network effects and expansion of a utility, can this enterprise actually happen if the SEC determines that the use of market makers to distribute a utility token with a minimum value floor requirement transforms that utility token magically into a security? If Ripple had to prefund the value of the utility token with private investors, how are they going to demonstrate the utility of their business proposition without distribution of the parts? An analogy that applies to Ripple and a bunch of other token projects: Say a construction company wanted to build houses in a poor community, and yet required donations to purchase wood, nails and paint - they had the blueprints and the labor lined up. Would that constitute the selling of a security. Does this mean Habitat for Humanity should be sued by the SEC for selling securities? How do sites like Kickstarter exist? Why isn't the SEC going after all of these startups collecting pledges? At the outset, XRP was worth nothing - I don't even know if you could make the argument that it was worth the premining energy cost. Buying XRP was like all other crowdfunding operations as they stand - you are pledging money to a company so that it can build an infrastructure on top of that liquidity. It wasn't even as though we were promised any product or form of restitution if Ripple succeeded. Buying XRP was essentially like pledging to a Kickstarter campaign with no reward. Believing XRP would go up in value - and that this was the basis of their sales of XRP - is like believing that by donating to Habitat for Humanity the value of lumber and steel as commodities would rise. Except that with XRP you are buying into the utility unit of exchange within a closed system. You can't find XRP on the street. There is no loose change - you can't magically find satoshis randomly on the ethereum network. Every asset on the network is locked in and accounted for. There isn't a single XRP that has no owner on the ledger (that doesn't mean they are all liquid or accessible). This is unlike just about every commodity in existence. Most commodities are closed network only in the sense that they must be found on this planet. But digital assets are locked into their network in a way that allows every molecule of value in the closed system to be owned and transferred. Putting a dollar value market on top of that organic exchange doesn't magically make it a security. As I already said in other ways in my SEC complaint, I bought XRP in the same way I buy a tree in a forest that has limited growth capacity and once those trees are cut down we have to make the best out of the trees that are left. Scarcity and utility are what I believe will ultimately drive up the value of the token - regardless of whether the trees burn because Ripple chops them down or R3 chops them down or Flare chops them down or suddenly some Mellon guy dies and a couple million trees petrify. If XRP is a security, then every faucet is a security. Everyone who received a coin from a faucet with the intent to sell owns a security. You can't tell me that these airdrops and faucets and other distribution methods used by all of these different projects were not promoted to sell on the open market. Who really believes that Yfi going around and saying that their token has no intrinsic value is going to allow them to escape the SEC when it is made available for trading on exchanges? The outcome of the effect of a project owner distributing their token with the expectation of it being traded on an open market affects every crypto. If making markets changes digital assets into securities, then there are going to be a ton of follow-up lawsuits and it will get ugly quickly. I think the SEC knows how closed loop systems work, and they know what happens to their power and relevance if any of these systems becomes central to the global economy and they don't have a piece of the action. They are part of the fat that smart contracts intend to trim from the bureaucratic sacred cow. It would not surprise me if they launched this because the threat of XRP combined with smart contracts creates a real problem for the powers that be.
  10. Generally for the same reason I often buy electronics that are open box and have been checked by somebody. The company has gone from lacking regulation to gaining regulation. I'd rather invest in something where the company is being watched and regulated than something awaiting regulation. There's a reason why Kickstarter sucks so badly for most pledgees - no oversight. EDIT: When the SEC and Kik settled, part of the agreement was that Kik couldn't sell any of its Kin holdings without notifying the SEC first. That helped inspire some confidence in the structure and accountability for the project. The price responded very positively. Interesting to note, Solana did retract their initial grant of Solana after the lawsuit was settled, and this did briefly throw the migration plan to KIN4 up in the air, but in the end the technology advantages were worth it - the Kin Foundation was willing to pay that price to get the edge they needed over their Stellar KIN3 chain bottlenecks.
  11. Is Institutional Investor C aka SBI Holdings? Why are their sales recorded here, but none of the usage statistics for the efforts that they are taking? It seems like the international volume and usage of XRP by international players is not accounted for here - only sales and operations within the US. The numbers used to justify a "lack of use" just seem too low unless information coming from Crypto Eri and other international sources in the space are inaccurate. I'm afraid it is quite disingenuous to portray XRP as having no real use case while only counting domestic use of the token. EDIT: Yeah the whole 123-128 section of the complaint seems especially vague and is missing a lot of pieces. If they have a major player they'd like to make an example of, if seems like here would be the place to demonstrate that ODL/xRapid is not actually being used internationally along with some proof that these actors were just selling off XRP and not applying it to any business case.
  12. I would absolutely be on board. I've just been playing with paystring but I'd love to dig deep into the ledger with some guidance.
  13. Well the optics alone are certainly better. At the same time, I see a lot of these circles and meetings at the upper echelon of global society where Brad and Chris have been allowed to sit at the table and I wonder how pay-to-play all those opportunities were. These are not your typical crypto conventions. The juror in me is still out - I'd like to understand better where all of that money went to, and if it would have gone to things that normally Ripple the company would have had to pay for instead of either Brad or Chris having to sacrifice portions of their stash to grease a few palms globally.
  14. Yeah, and perhaps someone else would be getting sued for cornering the market later. Like, say, a big bank. Lol. I wouldn't say the distribution of bitcoin has ended up being what was originally intended to be fair or democratic - the wealth is getting centralized and pumped by media now. Free market forces tend to centralize wealth under oligarchies - like the distribution of stock to the population at the fall of communism in Russia being bought up when people were starving at pennies on the dollar.
  15. I think you are right, but that doesn't work either. And they did faucets for awhile right? A friend of mine had gotten over 100k this way sub-cent and sold them all at a pittance. Not to shill, but this was one of the reasons I bought into and support Metronome - their token economics made a tremendous amount of sense to me, and it still does, aside from the inflationary aspect - though even their justification makes sense as the scarcity of btc already is now becoming an issue. That is the core issue to me now - ethical distribution. It's another chicken and egg problem when your business model depends on the token having some sort of market-driven value. Hiding the sales while telling everyone you are going long is not the answer either, as we are discovering.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.