Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Fazzyfocus

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    I read stuff. I write stuff. I make stuff. I build stuff. I break stuff.

    Stuff in general really..
  • Location
  • Occupation
    Grand Poobah of Nothing

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It was actually done as a gentlemanly courtesy. But do feel free to interpret as you please.
  2. For the record by the way. I don't hate lobbyists. I hate specific causes behind lobbying on occasion but that is like saying you hate everyone that advocates for change. Change can be for the better or worse. Lobbyists for the NRA? Yes that is stupidity. They ahve plenty of power and america has enough gun deaths already Lobbyists for philanthropy? Hardly applicable in the same boat. Painting all with the same brush because they use the same tools is not wise when the agendas are different. Its a little short sighted.
  3. I'm fairly certain that is what is described in professional circles as a "Mic drop". Lucky. Fudbusting fudspreaders since 2010 inc.
  4. It's the very definition of a conflict of interest. A statement of the nature already given by Hester Pierce is already a fine line. She would absolutely be aware of the cases and would know that a statement of that nature which all but mentions ripple is likely to be the furthest she could go politically without rocking the boat between SEC and DoJ as it's a public statement. EDIT: it's what is known as separation of power. That's the crux of it.
  5. Fair points, however I think (from a legal perspective at least) you might be underestimating the power of the courts. The scenario when you look at the bigger picture outside the realms of the SEC and the CTFC is multiple individuals (rightly or wrongly) have made an allegation of improper financial conduct through the courts. This opens up the remit of the department of justice. Given this is the first type of case of its kind, the implications are pretty serious in the absence of a legal definition through congress in the form of legislation. (Let's assume TTA doesn't pass before the cases come to trial for the purposes of this discussion). In this scenario, whilst I would normally agree that the SEC would not take a "consultancy" style role to the DoJ normally, I believe here...They will be forced to. Trial should consider evidence from both sides AND guidance from the SEC before the DoJ can make an informed and correct interpretation of laws that exist now (securities trading) whilst being aware that these kind of assets are in the procrss of being regulated. The point is, this is the first case of its kind. The result of this will set precedent either opening the floodgates for Any one and everyone to sue ripple OR (more likely) shut that specific door for that specific legal action in the event of a not guilty verdict.
  6. For the record. Hester Maria Peirce is a Woman. Not a Man. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hester_Peirce Whist she might be attempting to close the door on early hard and fast rules, the allusion is enough to help Ripple and Mary Jo White set a new precedent in court that XRP is not a security. The nuanced approach is one thing. A legal case is another. The ruling won't neccesarily determine what XRP is, but it likely will determine what it ISN'T.
  7. Possibly I guess. Personally? I would prefer it getting nailed by summary judgement in court leaving absolutely no room for confusion in the future. Nail the matter. Close it once and for all and shut the door on even the thought of a future lawsuit being a consideration down this specific path for any one. Case closed. Literally.
  8. It may be worth you reading the statement in full. there is a lot more context in there. e.g: "Yet many of these projects begin in a centralized manner that looks about the same as any other start-up. A group of people get together to build something and they need to find investors to fund their efforts so they sell securities, sometimes called tokens. The SEC applies existing securities laws to these securities offerings, which means that they must be conducted in accordance with the securities laws or under an exemption. When the tokens are not being sold as investment contracts, however, they are not securities at all. Tokens sold for use in a functioning network, rather than as investment contracts, fall outside the definition of securities" That to me SCREAMS of Ripple sales to FI's for the purposes of creating liquidity in a functioning network.
  9. Not legally binding, but a statement of this kind all but "excuses" ripple in the upcoming cases. It certainly reads as though SEC are now beginning to understand DA's/DLT/Blockchain and the implications of how networks/network effects make a token not a security: Link to the full transcript here: https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/peirce-regulation-view-inside-machine
  10. I say no. Second life was useful only to a small segment of people who are into escapism and gaming/VR. Blockchain and crypto have a FAR greater reach. As for the hype death of crypto, In the longest bear market to date, that is entirely to be expected. Whilst I am no fan of proof of work and its a associated tech, from a tech analysis perspective, the numbers dont really lie. Macro charts are consistent in BTC pattern on the log scale and the amount of work gone into developing the cryptospace over the last year is phenomenal. perspective on the tech analysis. The forecast may or may not happen, but the peaks and troughs would definitely speak to counter the death of hype. Rather... I would say t has simply gone into hibernation while the bears are out to play...
  11. That is quite a compliment. Very kind. Thank you.
  12. Well noted. My personal favourite comes from Socrates: One thing I know is I know nothing. This is the source of my wisdom. Apt in this case in particular, as I had no idea about the Plato quote.
  13. Fair argument. From the perspective of "extremism" yes, we have definitely succumbed to tribalism. absolutely.
  14. In my latest article, I decided to move away from the research based pieces I have been writing recently to have something of a rant. This is a bit of a long one and its purely opinion based, but I suspect opinion that may well be shared if not always vocalised. thoughts welcome. :)
  • Create New...