Crypto - Bitcoin XRP ETH DarkMoon NFTs

[Suranis]

Crypto media site secretly funded by Crypto company. Everyone pretends to be shocked.

Crypto Markets Today: Exposed Alameda Research Loans to Media Site The Block and Its CEO Adds to FTX’s Miseries
The Block confirmed Friday it had received funding from Sam Bankman-Fried’s trading arm for two years.
By Jocelyn Yang

Crypto media site The Block was secretly funded over the last two years by Sam Bankman-Fried’s Alameda Research, according to a report by Axios. The Block confirmed the report on Friday.

This article originally appeared in Crypto Markets Today, CoinDesk’s daily newsletter diving into what happened in today's crypto markets. Subscribe to get it in your inbox every day.

The Block’s CEO, Michael McCaffrey, immediately resigned after the loans came to light. He will also step down from The Block's board.
No one at the company had any knowledge of the loans except for McCaffrey, according to the company.
McCaffrey received three loans for a total of $43 million from 2021 through this year, The Block confirmed.
Bobby Moran, The Block’s chief revenue officer, will be stepping into the role of CEO effective immediately, according to the report.
“From our own experience, we have seen no evidence that Mike ever sought to improperly influence the newsroom or research teams, particularly in their coverage of SBF, FTX and Alameda Research,” Moran said in a statement.
Frank Chaparro, an editor-at-large at The Block, said in a tweet that he was "gutted by this news,” which was briefed to the company Friday afternoon, adding that McCaffrey "kept every single one of us in the dark."
The Block is a competitor to CoinDesk.

Edit: Forgot the link https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/1 ... -miseries/

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

I translate "Crypto" in my head bone to "Cryptic" cuz I don't understand none of it.

[Slarti the White]

I translate "Crypto" in my head bone to "Cryptic" cuz I don't understand none of it.

It's a really complicated way to run a Ponzi scheme. While there is a highly sophisticated technology behind it (blockchain), that is essentially the "patter" to keep people from noticing that Crypto is a currency that has no basis for its value. There is no commodity it can be redeemed for at the end of the line or institution that is guaranteeing it. It operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth and once that faith is broken all the king's horses and all the king's men can't put it back together again...

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Thank you, Slarti!!!!!!

[Foggy]

It operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth ...

In actual fact, the paper (cloth) and ink on a $20 bill are not worth twenty dollars. Paper money operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth, too also.

Hell, even gold coins operate on a shared belief in their intrinsic worth. If I don't think gold is right for me - too malleable, wrong color, conducts electricity when I need an insulator, stuff like that - I might value it less personally, but because of the shared belief that it is valuable, I would value it based on that shared belief in dealing with the world.

But a $20 bill is valuable because the government says it is. The basis for having a shared belief in it is stronger when the government says so versus some geeks with blockchains saying their money is worth something.

"You just gotta believe!" works pretty well for Peter Pan. For money, not so much.

I actually have a degree in economics from Georgetown and I don't understand any of this shit.

[RTH10260]

Cryptocurrency has at least the value of mining it, the rigs and the electricity, a bit manpower invested, and the investment into running the ledgers and merchant system on the web.

It's the same as with real world stuff, somebody is investing to mine the precious metals and want's to see a payback.

[Slarti the White]

It operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth ...

In actual fact, the paper (cloth) and ink on a $20 bill are not worth twenty dollars. Paper money operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth, too also.

Hell, even gold coins operate on a shared belief in their intrinsic worth. If I don't think gold is right for me - too malleable, wrong color, stuff like that - I might value it less personally, but because of the shared belief that it is valuable, I would value it based on that shared belief in dealing with the world.

But a $20 bill is valuable because the government says it is. The basis for having a shared belief in it is stronger when the government says so versus some geeks with blockchains saying their money is worth something.

"You just gotta believe!" works pretty well for Peter Pan. For money, not so much.

I actually have a degree in economics from Georgetown and I don't understand any of this shit.

"Intrinsic" was a poor word choice there -- you are right that a $20 bill doesn't have any intrinsic value, but it is backed by the US government as "legal tender for all debts public and private". Faith in the currency itself isn't required, just faith in the government that is backing it. While it is true that faith in the government can break down, most governments are far more stable that crypto companies. As I understand it, Stablecoin is an attempt to create a fixed value for cryptocurrencies, but I don't think something like that can be "bolted on" after the fact, it needs to be baked in to the system. Anyway, all of this is just my take on it -- I'm not a crypto expert nor do I even have a degree in economics, but I do understand that the value in any medium of exchange rests in the shared belief of those who use it.

[Suranis]

Ya, you dont actually NEED to understand the ins and outs of blockchains (though if you do you realize how completely unsuitable they are for being a currency) any more than you NEED to understand how to make Beanie Babies or Tulips.

All you need to know is that people will buy them for a price they are not worth because they think they will rise in value and they can sell them at a profit. That's it. All the waffle about databases and mining and crap is irrelevant. People buy a "Coin" in order to sell the Coin on later for a profit. That's all you need to know.

If you want the simple explanation of what a "coin" is, it's basically a database with a unique identity number that stores all the transactions that the "coin" has been used for, and it can be stored on multiple computers. "Mining" is running the vast amount of computing it takes to update these databases over and over as the "coin" is used to buy stuff and changes hands, and people compete to receive new "coins" to pay for doing the computing. And of course more and more computing power is needed to handle the "coin" transactions and trading as the amount of "coins" grow, as each individual Database has to be updated no matter how many transactions are happening right now to how many coins.

Which is why it takes hours or days for Bitcoin Purchases to work these days, as the amount of Bitcoin is far too much for the computer "mining" network to handle anymore. So Bitcoin is almost useless as a method of payment. But still it is traded back and forth by people convinced each unique database "coin" will eventually rise in price. You might as well be trading Cans of Heineken.

That's pretty much it. There a lot of waffle that is used to dazzle people and convince them that Techbros have some secret knowledge that sets them apart and Crypto is just too complicated to understand. But in reality, that's pretty much it. A distributed database program, which is what a Blockchain is, actually has some interesting possible applications, but being a "currency" is not one of them.

[Foggy]

Yeah, and I'm a huge fan of technology and the 21st century, y'all know that, I never shaddap about it. And I tried to give crypto a chance, but I just wasn't able to develop a shared belief that it was worth anything. If at any time in recent years I had somehow acquired some bitcoin of any kind, I wouldn't have been able to convert it to real money fast enough.

I just don't gotta believe.

Or maybe, I don't just gotta be- ...

No.

I believe I don't just gotta.



Whatevs.

[neonzx]

I recently received a mail offer for a new credit card with rewards. Cash-back in Crypto.

Yeah, I will get right on responding to that offer.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

You get the BEST offers - Trump Campaign Cabinet Member and now Crypto rewards! Just WOW!!!

[Danraft]

There is another problem with Cryptocurrency being “currency”and an investment—it goes up in value.

Most things go down in value over time— at least those things for which humans began using money. Harvested food crops rot, pressed oil goes rancid, lumber can get ruined in many ways, a car loses value as soon as it is driven off the lot, etc.

The depreciation of goods over time is part of standard accounting.

So, if a currency goes up in value there isn’t a drive to spend it and there should be a drive to spend it. Investment and reinvestment is what drives economies.

Therefore inflation is kind of built into the use of currency to keep money in circulation and resources available.

It doesn’t take much loss of value over time, .2% a year seems to be enough (of course, too much loss of value and the currency isn’t able to be trusted).

Cryptocurrency does not have the use-it-or-lose-it quality that traditional currencies do. So people have done the equivalent of stuffing more and more money into their mattresses and not putting the money into banks (where it can be lended out) or into the economy by purchasing(thereby creating jobs, etc).

Then, all of a sudden when one goes to check on the the money buried in the backyard, it turns out that it almost all rotted.

A horrible situation— not only did the alleged currency cause economies to stagnate by increasing in value at the rate that there was an aversion to spending it which causes stagnation…. It was unstable and ultimately collapsed.

[keith]

Ya, you dont actually NEED to understand the ins and outs of blockchains (though if you do you realize how completely unsuitable they are for being a currency) any more than you NEED to understand how to make Beanie Babies or Tulips.

all of that


That was an excellent summary, and correct in every particular.

Well done. You should publish that widely.

[Gregg]

Cryptocurrency has at least the value of mining it, the rigs and the electricity, a bit manpower invested, and the investment into running the ledgers and merchant system on the web.

It's the same as with real world stuff, somebody is investing to mine the precious metals and want's to see a payback.

The "mining" is a useless waste of electrictity (and it's about as much as a smallish European nation uses now) for not good purpose, the ledgers being kept are ledgers of nothing.

It's can't be used for actual trading for goods and services, it's too voltile for any business of any size to be able to risk holding it. Sure, you can buy a pizza with it and the pizza joint will hold it and play along the little game but why, tell me, would Pizza Hut, a multinational brand, accept it? Say they were taking Bitcoin and on the weekend of the Super Bowl (Pizza's big weekened, BTW) they take say, half a billion dollars worth of bitcoin. Then, immediately after the game, before they even have a chance to count it all and convert it to dollars, Elmo posts some random garbage on Twitter and the price of BTC drops 10%. An absolutley viable possibility. YUM Brands just lost $100 million dollars in one night, a night which might well be their businest night of the year.

It's not outside the ability of nations to track or control. I mean, who the hell thought of the idea of a coin that's supossed value lay in it having a complete history of it's transactions since creation, being impossible to trace? "Here, take this string and pull it behind you wherever you go, it will make it impossible to follow you" Again, are people this dumb? The fact is, crypto is not much harder to trace than a personal check that you make sure to have your signature, fingerprints, address and banking info on. For a sterling example of this, look into Cofeezilla and his tracing of the money flow into and out of Roobets. He used nothing but the block chain to trace the true owners of an offshore gambling company that thought it had hidden itself in layers of corporate shells, offshore trusts and secret bank accounts. Took him about a week. From a couch on a youtube channel. But you think you're hiding from the NSA, CIA, IRS and your mother who doesn't know you watch porn. How cute.

Nope, not viable as a functioning currency and won't be until the volatility levels out. But that will never happen because the volatility is the point, it's what makes it something that can be traded, something shiny to turn just so in the light to foll the rubes, something to get your real money for their fake money. And all the "block chain" and Web3 bullshit is just 21st century mysticism intended to allow them to install themselves as the priesthood, the authoritries here to explain and control and command the new what the phuck ever it is.

The only value in crypto is that it allows a legally confused enough situation so as to make a pinzi scheme legal and attractive enough to appeal to mainstream finance, and when it all comes crashing down, as it must, we'll all stand around amazed that so many supposedly smart people fell for it.

[FiveAcres]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo ... -arrested/

Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, was arrested Monday in the Bahamas after U.S. prosecutors filed an indictment against him.

“Bahamian authorities arrested Samuel Bankman-Fried at the request of the U.S. Government,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement. “We expect to move to unseal the indictment in the morning and will have more to say at that time.”

FTX and Bankman-Fried have been under investigation by U.S. law enforcement agencies after his company imploded in November, losing billions of dollars of its customers’ money. He was slated to testify in front of the House Financial Services Committee Tuesday.

[Gregg]

It operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth ...

In actual fact, the paper (cloth) and ink on a $20 bill are not worth twenty dollars. Paper money operates on a shared belief in its intrinsic worth, too also.

Hell, even gold coins operate on a shared belief in their intrinsic worth. If I don't think gold is right for me - too malleable, wrong color, stuff like that - I might value it less personally, but because of the shared belief that it is valuable, I would value it based on that shared belief in dealing with the world.

But a $20 bill is valuable because the government says it is. The basis for having a shared belief in it is stronger when the government says so versus some geeks with blockchains saying their money is worth something.

"You just gotta believe!" works pretty well for Peter Pan. For money, not so much.

I actually have a degree in economics from Georgetown and I don't understand any of this shit.

"Intrinsic" was a poor word choice there -- you are right that a $20 bill doesn't have any intrinsic value, but it is backed by the US government as "legal tender for all debts public and private". Faith in the currency itself isn't required, just faith in the government that is backing it. While it is true that faith in the government can break down, most governments are far more stable that crypto companies. As I understand it, Stablecoin is an attempt to create a fixed value for cryptocurrencies, but I don't think something like that can be "bolted on" after the fact, it needs to be baked in to the system. Anyway, all of this is just my take on it -- I'm not a crypto expert nor do I even have a degree in economics, but I do understand that the value in any medium of exchange rests in the shared belief of those who use it.

The ''textbook'' definition of money is 'that which you can use to pay your taxes".
Because all commerce in a controlled environment where you can be compelled to give what you recived payment for, boils down to taxation.

[Gregg]

This steps in at the middle of another conversation, but this is something I wrote some years ago trying to explain how "fiat" money is in fact not created out of thin air. And it's not created by keepeing a ledger either...

When you buy a house, say, and to simplify it this is a new house (existing homes do the same thing but the mechanics are more complicated for reasons not relevant to this discussion) and you pay, say $200K for it, a lot of money was created, by a lot of people and or companies etc... Unless you have a few years, just trust me on this concept but the end result is that money was created by all those people paying off their own mortgages or car loans or investing their savings...whatever they do with the coin they earn. You didn't create that money, they did and for all intents and purposes that money came into existence when that check the bank (or whatever) wrote based upon your note was cashed. But like I said, that is not the money you created, its the money they created, it just gets born when they get paid for creating it. And not all they they are paid is the new money, in fact, most of it is just a relocation of the existing money supply, but the things they did that made the economy larger than it was is in fact new money. Now since the money they are being paid isn't located anywhere yet, someone, somewhere, needs to fire up the printing press and make some Benjamins cause eventually all those electrons and account credits and debits and checks and such are gonna be reduced to someone wanting to buy a pack or Lucky Strikes at a place that doesn't take credit cards or checks.

Enter the all encompassing evil empire local Federal Reserve Bank. Not to be confused with the Federal Reserve Board, which is a government entity (search my posts for a good description of the difference, I've explained it before and like I said, I'm in a bit of a rush here)

He contnued...

And we're back, dinner is done and now I'm eating while I type, and negotiating with a veteran of the 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Assault Regiment about how much she is gonna get, but I digress.

Remember back in the beginning when the bank (or whatever) wrote a check to the home builder and in fact didn't have that money setting in a drawer to cover the check? As I said, that check is gonna bounce unless someone puts money in an account to cover it. Well, as I explained, that note is going to usually sold on the secondary market, and thus the bank (or whatever) will get the money (that was created when the builder and his cast of dozens paid their mortgages but isn't actually anyplace just yet) to cover the check. Of course, the secondary market isn't Ebay so they don't get that money same day. So what do they do? There's not any (or whatever) here, this has to be a bank or, since the 80's, savings and loan for this but there are other methods that serve the same function for other lenders, clears the checks they write through the local Federal Reserve Bank. If the bank needs short term cash to bridge the time from when the check needs to clear and when they get proceeds from selling the note, the Fed will cover it, through several functions but usually and for the sake of simplicity here lets say they front the money from the Discount Window. To borrow from the Fed a bank must have "good collateral" and the Fed defines what that is. Interestingly, what is good collateral is a judgement call and what is good today may not be good tomorrow, and even what is good for Citibank is not always good for Chase. (the other major mechanism for getting money short term is the Money Market, a private system that works a lot like the Discount Window as far as function, although it is limited to relocating existing money, whereas the Discount Window can create new money.)

So, anyway, when a bank borrows from the Fed, (actually its more accurate to say that when the funds associated with a note that creates new money reaches the Fed because those funds always, eventually reach the Fed either through lending or Open Market Operations, but again, let's keep this simple) the Fed covers the check, notes that XYZ Bank owes them the money and to the extent that new money has been created they then make this money into existence on the books of all the institutions involved.

Okay, me and Chili Dog are gonna finish dinner, I may come back, but until then Patriotwhatever, there is your answer. Yes, banks loan money, its just that the actual acts of what happens when they do confuses a lot of idiots who try to apply Sovidgit logic to it in order to reach a predetermined, if misguided, sound bite answer.

He concluded....

It can last as long as the growth of the money supply is in fact tied to the actual creation of new wealth. That, in a very, very simplified term, is what the Federal Reserve does, it creates new money while trying to match that increase in the money supply to the actual new wealth that was at the same time created by economic activity. The reason this has ebbs and flows and thus cannot be done by robots is that the actions of the Fed today affect the market over the next days/weeks/months and they are acting based upon information that is as much as 6 months old when they act upon it.

Trust me on this, because truly, I know what you do not, get down on your knees and thank whatever deity you believe in that the Federal Reserve is mostly private and the part that is Government is about as isolated from our political institutions as any "Federal" anything. It is hard enough for honest and wicked smart bankers to run it without destroying reality, you cannot even imagine how phucked up it would quickly become if Congress had anything to do with it. It would be a lot worse than taking the teacher out of a classroom of 13 year old boys and tossing a bag of automatic weapons in, and then locking the door.

[Slarti the White]

At this point I'm just wondering if there is another rally left in crypto or if the bubble is burst for good. Are there enough big money marks left in the pool for a last hurrah?

[pipistrelle]

Cryptocurrency has at least the value of mining it, the rigs and the electricity, a bit manpower invested, and the investment into running the ledgers and merchant system on the web.

It's the same as with real world stuff, somebody is investing to mine the precious metals and want's to see a payback.

The "mining" is a useless waste of electrictity (and it's about as much as a smallish European nation uses now) for not good purpose, the ledgers being kept are ledgers of nothing.

This ^ pisses me off no end. What a waste. And I suspect they're ruining communities.
https://finbold.com/tennessee-bitcoin-m ... residents/

Despite the fact that cryptocurrencies are gaining traction and more people are jumping on the bandwagon, trying to earn income from trading or mining them, certain crypto mining operations are forced to shut down or relocate due to complaints from nearby residents.

One of them is a Bitcoin (BTC) mine in Limestone, Tennessee, which was ordered to cease its operations at its current location after the county’s commissioners approved a lawsuit settlement filed after residents’ complaints, according to a report by WJHL.com on June 9.

Washington County has claimed that the mine violates zoning laws and produces too much noise, the latter of which the commissioners have begun to seek to address a year before the settlement.

That said, the settlement allows Red Dog – the company owning the mine – to build a new one at a more suitable location – the Washington County Industrial Park.

[busterbunker]

They also invaded eastern Washington, sucking up their hydro-electric. The dams in both areas share a history in the plutonium business.

[Kendra]

Boy, this FTX thing sounds like all kinds of crazy. Heard on CNN that they were so incompetent they used Quickbooks to run this huge company

LOL, first off on the first hour of Fox and Friends and the hosts were quite peevish that DOJ acted before he could have his testimony today. How dare Biden's DOJ do that?

[Gupwalla]

The ''textbook'' definition of money is 'that which you can use to pay your taxes".
Because all commerce in a controlled environment where you can be compelled to give what you recived payment for, boils down to taxation.

You can be slightly more upbeat by also including “that which the issuing government uses to pay its debt obligations” to the list.

Governments pay salaries and issue contracts for work, which is also part of what underpins the ultimate value of money. And from the standpoint of the government - spending creates money, taxation destroys it.

[noblepa]

Cryptocurrency has at least the value of mining it, the rigs and the electricity, a bit manpower invested, and the investment into running the ledgers and merchant system on the web.

It's the same as with real world stuff, somebody is investing to mine the precious metals and want's to see a payback.

The "mining" is a useless waste of electrictity (and it's about as much as a smallish European nation uses now) for not good purpose, the ledgers being kept are ledgers of nothing.

Yeah, I've never understood where the bitcoin (or any other cryptocurrency) "ore" that they are mining is supposed to be. Real-world mining is easy to understand. Someone goes out, digs a hole, brings up some rocks, melts them down and extracts whatever mineral they are looking for. The iron, gold, silver, lithium or whatever was there all along. The miners just have to find it, bring it out and convert it to a useable form. Where are the unmined bitcoins to be found?

So, as someone who knows a little about computers, it always seemed to me that the "mining" of cryptocurrencies really meant "we went through a very complex and time-consuming process of making them up out of thin air". I think that, in the beginning, the complexity was there to prevent every Tom, Dick and Harry from simply creating his own bitcoins. But, in the last few years, enough people have learned how to do it, and are willing to spend the time and money, every Tom and Dick (Harry is still working on it) has done just that.

[noblepa]

Gregg, correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that individual banks don't create money so much as the banking system creates money.

I deposit $1,000 in my bank account. The bank deposits a small (5%?) portion of that with the Fed. My bank then loans the remaining $950 to someone, who deposits it in his bank (or spends it at a store, whose owner deposits it in HIS bank). That bank then deposits 5% with the Fed and loans out the remaining amount. And so on.

The upshot is that my $1,000 does the work of several thousand dollars.

This is why, when we are recovering from a recession or depression, economists want us to spend our money, not just hoard it in a bank, or pay down bills.

I've heard this referred to as the "velocity" of money. The faster it is spent, the more work it does in the economy.

I realize that this is a massive over simplification of the process.

I remember in 1974, I was a young programmer for a large Cleveland bank. I was assigned the duty to receive phone calls from the computer operations department, when the DDA system (checking accounts) crashed. This was before VPN or even significant dial-up capability, so I had to drive in to the data center. One night, I was sitting there at 3:00am, with a cup of coffee and a hexadecimal calculator, when it hit me: I was playing with a couple of billion dollars of someone else's money. There was no vault or safe where this wealth sat and my computer was simply keeping track of it. Those computer files WERE the wealth. I had to stop and take a walk and catch my breath.

[raison de arizona]

Have always heard that to stimulate the economy, you put money in the pockets of poor people. Because they'll spend it, unlike rich people, who will hoard it. Only one of those things stimulates the economy.