Jump to content

fareed

Member
  • Content count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. If the words hammer the point home coming from the other side of the coin so to speak... I'll take it.
  2. correct. This is known as legal precedent. Once a ruling has been made the first time, it applies thereafter under the same circumstances.
  3. double post by accident. admin please delete!
  4. There is a mirror argument that sort of capitalizes on this point though. Given the FinCEN agreement signed by the DOJ, there are two major government departments here that have classified XRP as a currency by settlement with prejudice. Now whilst the SEC may not have made the point themselves, it is their job to ensure that no entity trades securities without a licence. Given the agreement was signed three years ago and has been in the public domain since then, that just SCREAMS the SEC believe it isnt a security. If they were to rule otherwise now, they would have to face the question: "well if this has been going on for three years...why the hell didnt you stop it earlier??!!" not a chance the case will go any direction other than being ruled as XRP not being a security. Not just because of the facts that XRP isnt, but politically, the SEC would end up with egg on their face if it was ruled to be a security. Backroom handshakes on this one I would guess.
  5. Meh. coinbase who? When JP Morgan eventually come into the light and sign onto Xrapid coinbase will look like a steaming pile of labradoodle ****.
  6. The immediate comparison that would come to mind in that scenario then would probably be Moneytap as the use case is similar and if Ripple were to roll out something with a generic malliable front end, Moneytap would have probably been down a similar path... but they dont really look too similar. Besides, a lot of these financial institutions will be so precious regarding their brand guidelines and the manner in which logo lockups, position in relation to text and layout has to be adhered to, creating something generic even if it were adaptable would probably be unlikely to work in a real world scenario.
  7. Irrespective I think we can all agree that either: a) this is One Pay FX with a different skin where they have removed the limit for this one occasion OR b) A re-skinned OnePay FX licenced to a third party who are using it for similar purposes If it were the latter, I would imagine we might have picked up news on it already so as much as I want to hope its the latter... I would guess its likely to be the former.
  8. meaning what? Are you in here to point and scream shitcoin for any particular reason?
  9. If they have done that... that makes more sense to me as it goes due to the $10K limit. appearance totally marries up, but the $10K limit on transfer was a question in my mind
  10. We will take any sodding clue we can and dig. lol
  11. specifically - this image kinda gives that away:
  12. I think you may well have nailed it there. https://appadvice.com/app/onepay-fx/1363143795
  13. yup. its a iPhone. either a 6 or 6S
  14. Around 1:47 is where he picks up the phone from the arm of the chair and you see the back, then he turns it round to show face.
  15. looks like an iPhone 6 or 6 S to me from the back
×