Jump to content

Zerponaut

Gold Member
  • Content Count

    3,597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Zerponaut

  • Rank
    Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

2,542 profile views
  1. Absolutely. I've been thinking this about Brad and other parties being 'complimentary' towards BTC and ETH lately. It's classic killing them with kindness. The more attention drawn to them, the more everyone finds out about their bad traits.
  2. It's not even an argument, it's common sense. Of course bitcoin 'should' move towards another more eco-friendly consensus method. And I agree, they can't, or at least it would be bloody hard - I'm sure the miners that have complete control over bitcoin now would be upset - and in the process bitcoin would destroy their god complex decentralized argument because it would show the magical code can be changed at a whim by the decision of a few. So **** them. When the world grows up, hopefully in another 5-10 years, bitcoin will be a pariah. BTC's corporate backers will see their sustain
  3. Dunno but I think the XRPL DEX should be an option. But it's a bit more complicated
  4. Well at least it's not Rule 589. Now that would have been too much.
  5. So how's your #flippening going these days?
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. LOL, that’s Cory in the Bloomberg interview in the vid.
  9. 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.
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. 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
×
×
  • 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.