Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by WrathofKahneman

  1. Fwiw, taking possession of Songbird in BiFrost no value can be displayed so it is reporting as worth nothing right now. Bodes well, I hope for US taxes.
  2. Not sure the tweet embedded, but it's still early. FTSO - 3.5m BiFrost -3.1m FTSO AU -2.2M FTSO UK 1.7m What's impressive to me is that, as far as I can tell, there has been a lot of uptake with BiFrost, which probably put a lot of delegation in their FTSO. Meanwhile everyone on MM has to fumble along (disclaimer - MM irritates me ) Hope you are surviving & thriving in the blitz, @FTSO_AU. More to come!
  3. The Coinbase/Armstrong comments are totally disingenuous. It's pretty clear - on the first page of the Securities act of '33- that loans are a security and there are 7 exemptions, none of which fit their proposed product. If I, internet spitballing schlub, can find this info inside of 30min and gain a basic understanding, shouldn't a publicly listed corporation whose CEO went on to head a regulatory agency at least have a clue? They wanted feedback to make it work, but the SEC told them it doesn't. What more should they have said? If Coinbase wants to lend like any bank, then they can subject themselves to banking regulations and back loans w/100% actual collateral. They know this. I can see that some original sales of XRP to bootstrap things might be securities, just like ETH was, but that the security status is not inherent and no longer applies to XRP. I hope it isn't true, but it's at least reasonable in light of current regulations. (slap on the wrist for sales ~10 years ago, XRP not a security, Larsen & Garlinghouse cases dismissed) The concerning thing is that the SEC seems awfully capricious in how they administer the law, and clearing ETH as a security only highlights this. US regulations need to be cleared up ASAP. Why are some platforms are allowed to lend, but others aren't? They will, in the end, all be regulated though because they pose a risk to the existing financial world, i'm sure. But Coinbase is just an opportunist trying to leverage the sentiment around the Ripple case. Honestly, they can pound sand.
  4. Probably, but tbh, I enjoy the silence. It looks like they are learning on the fly about marketing and comms.
  5. So the premise of the video is great; Velo is a competitor to Ripple in the region. You have to expect competition. Some further considerations about the issue: Stellar and XRPL work in much the same way, and they are talking about using issued assets. That means there is counterparty risk to using the Velo token instead of XLM. This risk can be mitigated by the contracts people sign to join the network. It's not an unreasonable risk - banks must trust each other somewhat as is. It also in all likelihood means prefunding larger payments - at least that's what some of the Lightnet stuff has seemed to say. (Notice in the 2nd interview they are comparing to stablecoins - which IBM issues on Stellar, but they don't want that, they want to be able to peg their own values; tokenize as they see fit among the participating people.) Velo has partnered with Tempo Payments and Bitazza who work with EU corridors. I believe Bitazza is a Lightnet investment. The press calls it a $17b corridor that is opening. I wonder how much/yr those two apps generate. A bigger threat than Stellar is that the company has Royal Family backers/ involvement. That goes a long ways towards trust and making connections. Don't forget that Thailand, too has an agreement with Malaysia for linking their national payment systems in a xborder mCBDC kind of system. That could impact remittances in the region. And after issuing 30b, only 40m are sold. Bootstrapping that kind of liquidity is hard So it's competition, but the question is whether the influence in Thailand can command enough tokenized assets among participating banks to provide the necessary liquidity.
  6. Fwiw, on the 2nd(?) beta, a great number of people were trying to pile into YFIN for the rewards. I don't know if that holds true when the platform goes live - real money changes things .
  7. I'm excited for Noise! I appreciate your comments, really, but my bias though is that evolutionary psychology is a pseudoscience. With respect, it is the phylogenic approach that's the problem. You just cant biologize cognitive science and then explain how those cognitive traits came about by evolution; it begs the question. We do not understand the mind-body problem, so how can we create narratives about how it developed a million years ago - based on what fossil records? It's just storie-building without any evidence. All it is left to explore is analogy, on a compressed evolutionary time scale, with no account for culture. But again, I am biased and the field, while popular, is very controversial. (He said on an XRP board... I'll stop now )
  8. Yeah, for sure. MGI did sign with CoinMe to use their Bitcoin app. Could it be that they tokenize BTC on the network and ship around treasury amounts like Ripple did? CoinMe offering an important gateway?
  9. Doesn't it kind of confirm Ripple's approach to bootstrapping liquidity - Stellar has none, so buy MGI and make them run on it?
  10. I would recommend Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" for good discussion about belief in decision making. Harari is hard for me because I love how he refuses an easy psychological reductionism/analogy (you don't have one "love" neuron that fires when you're happy), but then he plays evolutionary psychologist finding emergent properties, and evolutionary psychology is the worst sort of flim-flam. People only see what they project - there is no "mind" data available. Evolutionary psychology is worse than even economics. Maybe it's the totalizing power of capitalism, US crony capitalism in particular, pressurizing the need to discover the next Amazon, to escape being ground up by the 1% or to brag about your vision & virtue. But then there's just a lot of people selling stuff and talking s**t on the internet, too. Maybe most of the "true believers" who bought in just have something to sell.
  11. thanks, @Seoulite - I am particularly curious about how interoperable the tokens might be, if there is a possibility through different staking and minting options a stablecoin might inadvertently end up collateralizing assets from Songbird that aren't as proven/stable as those on Flare. Wasn't clear if the FTSO would remain FLR only. I wonder if securities issues become a talking point given governance. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  12. It's possible Brad & Chris have their cases taken care of, but Ripple is definitely going to be a while. A settlement where it is determined Ripple initially sold XRP as a security but no longer would still be a big win. It would signal XRP is not currently a security even though not formally within the SEC's role.
  13. fwiw, on the 14th, the account had a -20xrp tx. Bithomp is timing out for me right now, but first glance, it looks like another wallet opened? Could be anything but I can't pull the tx right now.
  14. So the judge seemed concerned overall about Ripple's eagerness to depose Hinman to find out about 3rd party conversations, in addition to the speech he gave. The Ripple team complained at the end that the SEC was stonewalling everything by invoking deliberative privilege. She granted the deposition noting that Ripple might cut off their nose to spite their face pursuing those 3rd party convos, in part I assume because she made clear there were other ways to gain knowledge of those besides deposing Hinman directly and didn't want him deposed 2x. It's clear though she thinks the case is exceptional and the Hinman speech is important. Then the Ripple defense raised the issue of meeting with ETH a week before his speech. She replied, "understood". very interesting.
  15. Is it fair to say that the wallet essentially absorbs an exchange's function for a payment sender? Through the wallet, Ripple directly provides XRP to the sender, receiving a fiat payment, at a slight premium over market price if the XRP is forwarded as a LOC. The receiving wallet will have to cash out on an exchange? (or could Ripple buy back the XRP on the other side in the wallet?) And then the age-old ODL confusion: in an imbalanced corridor, say USD->MEX, as XRP is always on exchange to be cashed out won't it suppress XRP price locally? And if so does it mean that price is stabilized by arbitrage alone primarily? If the XRP is sent to a receiver's wallet, not exchange, creating a slight holding time, does it incentivize holding XRP, allowing it to accumulate in the receiving wallet?
  16. But that's not what's happening. I just bought some in the US the other day. No exchange is banned from using it - the problem is securities law is not clear and many exchanges don't want to take the risk because they are not licensed for securities. If XRP were deemed a security - it would be completely legal to buy and own from licensed brokers, like Fidelty or Wells Fargo just like stocks. -and there you have it, the banks are making crazy money from a fully regulated and compliant XRP.
  17. Completely agree that people will be left out of wealth generating opportunities. I don't even think we have to imagine that for XRP - it is the case already. (esp. in Real Estate!) And because it's happening now, I see no need for the government to seize XRP for the banks to continue extracting these profits from people. Without eliding the difference between governments and banks, we have proof already confiscation/blocking of XRP isnt necessary. That's the statement from the video I differ with. Banks have lots of ways to retake value tied up in XRP - want a car loan? home loan? What if they run their own arbitrage bots to float the price higher? We know big banks are capable of manipulating FX and stock prices. XRP is not immune, especially if banks start using the DEX.
  18. Well, first, I take issue with the idea people will be scammed "later" - too conspiratorial for me. Look at the wealth gap in the world today, we have already always been scammed to be where we are now. As for the vid, I think he's a little too sci-fi; possible but not likely, and the definition of "fiat" starts to get hazy. Fiat implies the government can value it however they like. They confiscated gold in the US because USD was pegged to gold - it wasn't fiat. Today as true fiat, it is pegged however the government wishes. As long as USD is not pegged to XRP, they retain control. Besides, USD is already digitized, and it is a store of value off which other currencies derive their value. The government doesn't have to grab XRP, just require USD for taxes and tax it on the conversion and then they make $ off of the world's investment in it. I think the bigger issue governments are concerned about is monetary expansion. -but just a rank amateur opinion, he said he has an economics degree. Certainly deserves more thought. Econ seems like quantum physics.
  19. Wait..elites will scam us after XRP moons? -so these are the halcyon days?
  20. If the vote was to burn the FLR, how would that affect the other tokens coming onboard (DOGE, etc.)? Would they have a greater stake moving forward or would their portion be adjusted accordingly, in which case, XRP holders are making decisions for them? I know they're not part of the same drop. Need to re-read the paper. Could make for an entertaining mess.
  21. I understand the sentiment but there is a logic behind conforming to the strictest major market's rules. I'm sure they have a better understanding of where the FLR will be distributed, as well as some Anglophone tendencies. In the meantime I wonder what kind of communications, if any, happened between the IOU exchanges and Flare? Those discussions, even informal, just became more important.
  • 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.