Jump to content

Zerponaut

Gold Member
  • Content Count

    3,456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Zerponaut

  • Rank
    Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Dunno but I think the XRPL DEX should be an option. But it's a bit more complicated
  2. Well at least it's not Rule 589. Now that would have been too much.
  3. So how's your #flippening going these days?
  4. I won't be surprised to see whales dump it as soon as the markets open to tank the price and then turn around to scoop up the cheap FLR at a fraction of the price when the rest of the market panic sells after them.
  5. It's proof of what a mess regulation in crypto is. The NYC financial regulator gives validity to a crypto that has the integrity of a house of cards. Even if ETC's only approved for custody, someone willl get burnt and all cryptos will pay the price for years to come because the regulators don't know what they're doing, or worse. Maybe Brooks just has a bag of ETC from his Coinbase days or some favours to repay.
  6. LOL, that’s Cory in the Bloomberg interview in the vid.
  7. Faketoshi and nChain = future patent trolls that could seriously impede the crypto space, both for innovators and investors. It’s pure arrogance, hubris and greed, horrible.
  8. This claim was ridiculous and opportunist. I read the patent when the claim first came up and not that I'm any kind of legal eagle but it is so far from XRP and the XRPL. There is literally nothing in the patent that mentions 'money', 'value', 'finance', 'transfer', 'encrypted', 'secure' or any terms related to how XRP works. Here's the patent if anyone's interested https://patents.google.com/patent/US9432452
  9. I guess it depends on which country you're in - and previously the rule of thumb to be safe was to use FIFO - but I was looking for a relevant link and this one was interesting (read under 'Cost Basis'). It says a new ruling has been introduced. "specific identification" can now be used. This basically seems to give the green light for FILO accounting because, if your wallets are set up correctly you can specify when each unit was acquired and when it was disposed of. Interestingly this confirms that if you can't specify units you are to default to a FIFO method. See below from the f
  10. Yeah, I'm just trying to play devils advocate. I'm still bitter about crypto generally requiring FIFO accounting. From the Oxford Dictionary: "Fungible - (of goods contracted for without an individual specimen being specified) replaceable by another identical item; mutually interchangeable." My point is, crypto isn't strictly fungible. It meets most of the definitions, but I can theoretically prove that the 'coins' I traded today are NOT the same 'coins' I purchased two years ago, because I bought the recently traded 'coins' last week and they have been kept in separate wallets
  11. Next time I see an ant on my $ I'll think of you. (and be jealous)
  12. Then why does the tax dept basically consider crypto to be fungible?
×
×
  • 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.