Crypto thread
#81
(09-18-2019, 10:16 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Ethereum now the number one chain in transaction fees. 

[Image: EEwdR4uUwAA1Ycy?format=png&name=900x900]

Huh?

Sustainable?  I wonder.

Do you happen to have link to that?  What's the source?

Also, maybe you and some of the other etheads are going to have another flippening fantasy?  

To the extent that the information is credible, I would just suggest to enjoy such financial fee status while it lasts.... 

Surely, I have my doubts about any kind of meaningful sustainability, especially since there is still no kind of fix to ethereum's whole 2.0 that is supposedly coming out soon and I am still hearing about delays.  Nonetheless, I have been surprised previously with Ethereum in terms of pump-ability and sustainability of pumps, yet not really surprised in terms of much else.
Reply
#82
(09-19-2019, 01:00 AM)JayJuanGee Wrote:
(09-18-2019, 10:16 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Ethereum now the number one chain in transaction fees. 

[Image: EEwdR4uUwAA1Ycy?format=png&name=900x900]

Huh?

Sustainable?  I wonder.

[1]Do you happen to have link to that?  What's the source?

Also, maybe you and some of the other etheads are going to have another flippening fantasy?  

To the extent that the information is credible, I would just suggest to enjoy such financial fee status while it lasts.... 

[2]Surely, I have my doubts about any kind of meaningful sustainability, especially since there is still no kind of fix to ethereum's whole 2.0 that is supposedly coming out soon and I am still hearing about delays.  Nonetheless, I have been surprised previously with Ethereum in terms of pump-ability and sustainability of pumps, yet not really surprised in terms of much else.

[1]
https://messari.io/screener
-- You have to manually add the 'Fees' column on the 'Columns and Filters' sidebar which is why I only posted a photo

[2]
Yep, we'll see... But apparently Banco Santander doesn't share your doubts and has registered and tokenized a $20m bond on Ethereum.
Reply
#83
(09-19-2019, 02:11 AM)billydingdong Wrote:
(09-19-2019, 01:00 AM)JayJuanGee Wrote: [edited out]

[1]
https://messari.io/screener
-- You have to manually add the 'Fees' column on the 'Columns and Filters' sidebar which is why I only posted a photo

O.k. Thanks. I had heard of that site, but I had never gone to it. I was successfully able to sort by fees, and to thereby replicate similar results as you snap shot.

Messari.io has a lot of customizable column possibilities, like you suggested by going to the columns and filters tab. Could come in handy.


(09-19-2019, 02:11 AM)billydingdong Wrote: [2]
Yep, we'll see... But apparently Banco Santander doesn't share your doubts and  has registered and tokenized a $20m bond on Ethereum.

Had you NOT already mentioned that you were so bullish about Ethereum based on the fact that there were a lot of BIG NAME investors with supposed DEEP pockets getting behind ethereum, so who cares what I say, when you have BIG NAMEs? Sustainability still remains the question, and if you merely have BIG NAMES throwing away BIG money, but you are lacking fundamentals, then the BIG NAMES are still going to get BIGGLY screwed when the house of cards come crashing down if they are not able to get out before the crash, no?

Might be worth pondering the humor of one of DanHedl's tweets from today:

https://twitter.com/danheld/status/11743...21473?s=20

>>>>>>>>If your coin goes up when all the shitcoins go up, and your coin goes down when all the shitcoins go down, then your coin is a shitcoin.<<<<<<<
Reply
#84
Ethereum is a crypto version of theranos.
Reply
#85
(09-18-2019, 10:16 PM)billydingdong Wrote: Ethereum now the number one chain in transaction fees. 

[Image: EEwdR4uUwAA1Ycy?format=png&name=900x900]

For anyone who wants to hear more about this matter, today Laura Shin (on her podcast "Unconfirmed" - linked below) had a 25-minute discussion with Coin Metrics co-founder and COO Jacob Metrics about the Coin Metrics research into the possible causes of those increasing transaction fees on Ethereum.

https://overcast.fm/+L3Vij45bM
Reply
#86
I know there are a lot of people reading (lol...) so wanted to redo my previous post.

These crypto debates are dorky as hell, but I'm obsessed w/ this topic. The emergence of crypto assets could very well change the nature of exchange and commerce for a large portion of the population, and I believe that there is a more-than-small chance of a substantial capture of wealth in these crypto assets as various decentralized ledger technologies gain adoption and become understood, normalized and integrated in the wider economy.

It also might not happen so DYOR....


(09-20-2019, 02:04 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote: For anyone who wants to hear more about this matter, today Laura Shin (on her podcast "Unconfirmed" - linked below) had a 25-minute discussion with Coin Metrics co-founder and COO Jacob Metrics about the Coin Metrics research into the possible causes of those increasing transaction fees on Ethereum.

https://overcast.fm/+L3Vij45bM

Seriously good link, JJG. Much better than the shitposts from the knuckledragging Bitcoin cultists on twitter Smile

Worth noting, transaction fees are important as a measurement of demand for using a chain/network.

For those who don't know...miners get paid for processing transactions on a network. This is how a blockchain network is secured -- a miner processes a group of transactions and broadcasts it to the network as an encrypted block, other miners in the network verify the integrity of the block and then it is added it to the chain of blocks (of which they all have a copy). The original miner rewarded in the crypto currency of the network — the transaction fees for the transactions inside a block AND an additional block reward subsidy.

On most chains, the block reward will go away when the supply limit of the currency is reached so at some point, the fees generated for processing transactions will one day be the ONLY thing that keeps it secure. In this way, transaction fees are a VERY important metric for the long-term security and viability of a project.

So here's a summary of podcast:
  • Not the 1st time that Ethereum has passed Bitcoin in mining fees (happened also at one point in 2018)

  • This increase in mining fee revenues for Ethereum is primarily due to Tether transactions shifting from Omni (Bitcoin network) to Ethereum network. (Tether is a 'stablecoin' crypto currency that is pegged to the dollar)

  • This shift on Tether from Ethereum to Bitcoin has been accelerating since April 2019. The reason for the shift? Possibly because Ethereum transaction fees are lower than Bitcoin's, the block time is shorter and the blocks are larger. (i.e. it's cheaper and faster to transfer).

  • Additionally, Ethereum has also seen an uptick in transaction fees from growing use of decentralized applications (like MakerDAO) on the network.

  • The Bitcoin network has likely become more efficient with transaction batching, resulting in more lower costs per transaction and less $ to miners.

The broader Ethereum community was celebrating this minor 'transaction fee flippening', but Tether is a highly questionable project so I'm lukewarm. It would be better if this increase in transaction fees was coming completely from Ethereum-based app usage via smart contracts.

Update: Bitcoin is now back on top $350K vs $263K for Ethereum.
Reply
#87
(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: I know there are a lot of people reading (lol...) so wanted to redo my previous post.

Yeah. Probably 6 guys reading and two posting.

(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: These crypto debates are dorky as hell, but I'm obsessed w/ this topic.

Lot's of interesting things going on in the space, so just because STW guys are not interested does NOT mean that the topic is not important.

(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: The emergence of crypto assets could very well change the nature of exchange and commerce for a large portion of the population, and I believe that there is a more-than-small chance of a substantial capture of wealth in these crypto assets as various decentralized ledger technologies gain adoption and become understood, normalized and integrated in the wider economy.

Well, I understand that you consider ethereum to be important in terms of decentralized finance, and even though I recognize some of the contributions that ethereum is likely bringing to the concept of crowd funding, I consider the real world changing phenomenon to be hinged to bitcoin, including that we are likely witnessing the early stages of the largest wealth transfer in the history of man, from no coiners to coiners, and surely some of the other cryptos are going to benefit from such too, even though I consider them to be scams, vaporware and snakeoil imitations that are hanging of the coattails of bitcoin... anyhow, money going into the whole space will also likely have rippling effects of the largest wealth transfer in history on coins that are actually lacking in fundamentals.

(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: It also might not happen so DYOR....

That's true. There are no guarantees, that's for sure, and guys are responsible for their own finances instead of whining to me, billydingdong or any other poster who might be bullish about various aspects of price dynamics in the crypto space.

(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote:
(09-20-2019, 02:04 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote: For anyone who wants to hear more about this matter, today Laura Shin (on her podcast "Unconfirmed" - linked below) had a 25-minute discussion with Coin Metrics co-founder and COO Jacob Metrics about the Coin Metrics research into the possible causes of those increasing transaction fees on Ethereum.

https://overcast.fm/+L3Vij45bM

Seriously good link, JJG. Much better than the shitposts from the knuckledragging Bitcoin cultists on twitter Smile

Worth noting, transaction fees are important as a measurement of demand for using a chain/network.
Yes, it is true that transaction fees shows real world usage and also real world prices that people are willing to pay in order to use the blockchain/network.

(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: For those who don't know...miners get paid for processing transactions on a network. This is how a blockchain network is secured -- a miner processes a group of transactions and broadcasts it to the network as an encrypted block, other miners in the network verify the integrity of the block and then it is added it to the chain of blocks (of which they all have a copy). The original miner rewarded in the crypto currency of the network — the transaction fees for the transactions inside a block AND an additional block reward subsidy.

On most chains, the block reward will go away when the supply limit of the currency is reached so at some point, the fees generated for processing transactions will one day be the ONLY thing that keeps it secure. In this way, transaction fees are a VERY important metric for the long-term security and viability of a project.

Well, yeah there is a present cost that is represented by the fees and surely a future speculation regarding how or whether the fee market will develop into the future for any coin. I personally believe the more important metric is to see how much people are spending or willing to spend in the present and to monitor how that is changing, whether short term or long term in terms of how much people are continuing to be willing to spend on using the network.


(09-21-2019, 09:35 PM)billydingdong Wrote: So here's a summary of podcast:
  • Not the 1st time that Ethereum has passed Bitcoin in mining fees (happened also at one point in 2018)

  • This increase in mining fee revenues for Ethereum is primarily due to Tether transactions shifting from Omni (Bitcoin network) to Ethereum network. (Tether is a 'stablecoin' crypto currency that is pegged to the dollar)

  • This shift on Tether from Ethereum to Bitcoin has been accelerating since April 2019. The reason for the shift? Possibly because Ethereum transaction fees are lower than Bitcoin's, the block time is shorter and the blocks are larger. (i.e. it's cheaper and faster to transfer).

  • Additionally, Ethereum has also seen an uptick in transaction fees from growing use of decentralized applications (like MakerDAO) on the network.

  • The Bitcoin network has likely become more efficient with transaction batching, resulting in more lower costs per transaction and less $ to miners.

The broader Ethereum community was celebrating this minor 'transaction fee flippening', but Tether is a highly questionable project so I'm lukewarm. It would be better if this increase in transaction fees was coming completely from Ethereum-based app usage via smart contracts.

Update: Bitcoin is now back on top $350K vs $263K for Ethereum.

I think that is a fair enough summary, but I still would not read too much into the matter except for watching how it might continue to evolve and whether it is sustainable. I would not be so down regarding the tether aspect, either because that does tend to reflect real world value, even though some people have enjoyed accusing tether of engaging in fractional reserve type shenanigans that may or may not be as BIG of a deal as it is made out to be - but surely there are ongoing proceedings against Tether in terms of likely overreaching attempts by the NY Attorney General, and whether those prosecution attempts are going to be successful or not in terms of hampering Tether's ability to be used as a measure of value is also another moving dynamic that you have already expressed your discontent with the various uncertainties surrounding it.
Reply
#88
Some recent crypto news:

Perspective article about the considerations, logistics and possible timeline of institutional investor adoption of crypto assets.. The article mostly reviews adoption scenarios of hedge funds + mutual funds.



Morningstar will offer ratings of crypto assets. Another step toward legitimacy of the space.



An overview of the advantages/disadvantages and practicalities of  proof of stake security model v proof of work.



Also, here is a really interesting tweetstorm that is  based on an article that argues Ethereum's case  as an emerging value-layer over the internet. It also argues that Ethereum presents us a new model of money and the first that could legitimately position itself as a 'triple-point asset' — meaning it has characteristics of:

(a) a store of value (you can save it, use it as collateral, exchange with it)

(b) a capital asset (you can use it to earn income since you could stake and receive a dividend for securing the network)

(c )  a commodity (you can use it to run transactions on the Ethereum network).




A white hat hacker/researcher discovered a gigantic security vulnerability in the MakerDAO contract that collateralizes the DAI stablecoin. A bad actor would've been able to liquidate the entire $250 million worth of Ethereum collateral. This would've been a huge problem since MakerDAO is Ethereum's largest credible project.

Frightening.


edit: this happened awhile ago

Security vulnerabilities were found in Bitcoin Lightning Network and were exploited.
Reply
#89
(10-04-2019, 07:31 PM)billydingdong Wrote:

Also, here is a really interesting tweetstorm that is  based on an article that argues Ethereum's case  as an emerging value-layer over the internet. It also argues that Ethereum presents us a new model of money and the first that could legitimately position itself as a 'triple-point asset' — meaning it has characteristics of:

(a) a store of value (you can save it, use it as collateral, exchange with it)

(b) a capital asset (you can use it to earn income since you could stake and receive a dividend for securing the network)

(c )  a commodity (you can use it to run transactions on the Ethereum network).




A white hat hacker/researcher discovered a gigantic security vulnerability in the MakerDAO contract that collateralizes the DAI stablecoin. A bad actor would've been able to liquidate the entire $250 million worth of Ethereum collateral. This would've been a huge problem since MakerDAO is Ethereum's largest credible project.

Frightening.


[url=https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/38068/bitcoins-lightning-network-found-to-have-security-vulnerabilities][/url]


Interesting about the vulnerabilities. Huge career opportunity right now for young guys to jump into the Security sphere.

That said, am I the only one who has no faith in ETH whatsoever? Just look at the founder and how well his "quantum computer" project went. It all reeks of a giant sham. 

Now we are finding that the largest smart contracts are full of exploits like swiss cheese?

What a joke of a coin.
Reply
#90
(10-04-2019, 07:41 PM)Nulled Wrote: Interesting about the vulnerabilities. Huge career opportunity right now for young guys to jump into the Security sphere.

That said, am I the only one who has no faith in ETH whatsoever? Just look at the founder and how well his "quantum computer" project went. It all reeks of a giant sham. 

Now we are finding that the largest smart contracts are full of exploits like swiss cheese?

What a joke of a coin.

The problem in this case happened on a soon-to-be-released project's testnet — it wasn't yet live. 

But you're still right to be skeptical.  Various major Ethereum projects have their issues. There are severe known problems with Synthetix and significant potential ones with Compound, two of the largest 'DeFi' projects right now.

At the same time though, it also doesn't make much sense to handwave Ethereum as some kind of a 'sham' or 'joke'.

It doesn't seem like a 'joke' to the enterprises that are putting skin in the game and giving their vote of confidence to the project.

I also don't get the impression that the project is a 'sham' when coming across these detailed posts and technical discussions on scaling the network or when listening to this interview with a researcher about the current status of the protocol upgrade to Ethereum 2.0.

If you're able detect where these people are bullshitting, I'd like to know. From where I sit, it looks like a bunch of really smart people working earnestly and diligently to improve the project and build things of value on top of it.
Reply
#91
(10-04-2019, 07:41 PM)Nulled Wrote:
(10-04-2019, 07:31 PM)billydingdong Wrote:

Also, here is a really interesting tweetstorm that is  based on an article that argues Ethereum's case  as an emerging value-layer over the internet. It also argues that Ethereum presents us a new model of money and the first that could legitimately position itself as a 'triple-point asset' — meaning it has characteristics of:

(a) a store of value (you can save it, use it as collateral, exchange with it)

(b) a capital asset (you can use it to earn income since you could stake and receive a dividend for securing the network)

(c )  a commodity (you can use it to run transactions on the Ethereum network).




A white hat hacker/researcher discovered a gigantic security vulnerability in the MakerDAO contract that collateralizes the DAI stablecoin. A bad actor would've been able to liquidate the entire $250 million worth of Ethereum collateral. This would've been a huge problem since MakerDAO is Ethereum's largest credible project.

Frightening.


[url=https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/38068/bitcoins-lightning-network-found-to-have-security-vulnerabilities][/url]


Interesting about the vulnerabilities. Huge career opportunity right now for young guys to jump into the Security sphere.

That said, am I the only one who has no faith in ETH whatsoever? Just look at the founder and how well his "quantum computer" project went. It all reeks of a giant sham. 

Now we are finding that the largest smart contracts are full of exploits like swiss cheese?

What a joke of a coin.

To me, it makes much more sense to spend efforts in the direction of bitcoin, since ethereum seems to be gaining much of its credibility in the space because of the solidness of bitcoin and various attempts that really just build second layers on bitcoin.  Furthermore the storage of value and capital asset assertions are going to be difficult to solidify through the Proof of Stake shame, because the Proof of Work is really the contribution to the space in terms of making a system resilient towards attacks by BIG players, whether governments or otherwise.  

But hey I have already gone around the block sufficiently with billydingdong regarding my concerns about ethereum containing a bunch of uncertainties including the fact that there is a recognition that the base layer software needs to be rewritten from the ground up and my earlier proclamations that the mere fact that some BIG money enterprises want to invest into ethereum should not be enough to hold it up when it's house of uncertainty cards come crumbling down.
Reply
#92
All fair and good responses. I'm not a expert by any means, and I don't have some of the resources that these guys are investing into the ETH project overall.

I have been told that I have good intuition, it's saved my ass several times already. Simply put I cannot trust Vitalik Buterin.

[Image: Vitalik-Buterin-555x370.jpg]


Yes, some of that judgement is coming from this "look."

Is this the look of a genius? Some people think so, he is no doubtedly intelligent, but I simply am doubting that he has capability as a leader, and "cementing" the ETH project.

I've seen alot of these nerds and geeks. But this guy strikes me as the most unstable one I've seen.

Hate to re-hash an issue. I see you guys have already talked about this in detail.

Don't take any advice from me but I just can't get behind someone who can't even wear a hoodie or fix his hair.

Conversely, with Bitcoin, there is nobody to get behind. It's decentralized. And that's why It's here to stay.
Reply
#93
(10-05-2019, 06:10 AM)Nulled Wrote: All fair and good responses. I'm not a expert by any means, and I don't have some of the resources that these guys are investing into the ETH project overall.

I have been told that I have good intuition, it's saved my ass several times already. Simply put I cannot trust Vitalik Buterin.

[Image: Vitalik-Buterin-555x370.jpg]


Yes, some of that judgement is coming from this "look."

Is this the look of a genius? Some people think so, he is no doubtedly intelligent, but I simply am doubting that he has capability as a leader, and "cementing" the ETH project.

The whole situation with Ethereum is weird as fuck, but surely, a lot of snot-nosed 14 year olds did end up getting rich in the last few years from such product, as long as they either got in a few years ago, or cashed out some of their ethereum before the fall.

Yeah, and Vitalik was like 19 years old when he wrote ethereum's white-paper, and apparently, it is a kind of goofy whitepaper that had to be re-written and cannot easily be found (it has been whitewashed off of the webs), so based on his age and maturity, I agree it would be quite unlikely that he had skills and vision to lead such a project with any kind of profoundness or worldiness.  He had pretty much gone off in a temper tantrum because core devs in bitcoin had rejected having that shit built into bitcoin, which sure folks are free to build their own project, and that is what he did.

(10-05-2019, 06:10 AM)Nulled Wrote: I've seen alot of these nerds and geeks. But this guy strikes me as the most unstable one I've seen.

Hate to re-hash an issue. I see you guys have already talked about this in detail.

We did not really talk so much about the personal aspects, and sometimes personal aspects could be quasi-irrelevant, if the underlying product were good, but ethereum is a marketed-the-fuck out of product, so half the shit you hear about it is hype.

You have to give them a certain amount of credit with building a community around the project, so that does have some value, as billydingdong does argue about some of that.   Anyhow, we will see how long this stuff is propped up.  It could get pumped a few more times, too, and it is also possible that the seemingly fatal flaws might get worked out of it... doubtful, but possible.

(10-05-2019, 06:10 AM)Nulled Wrote: Don't take any advice from me but I just can't get behind someone who can't even wear a hoodie or fix his hair.

Conversely, with Bitcoin, there is nobody to get behind. It's decentralized. And that's why It's here to stay.

You are right that all crypto projects claiming to be bitcoin 2.0 or better than bitcoin  or improving on bitcoin have centralized figure problems or centralized committee problems, and bitcoin is surely the most decentralized out of any project - even though there are claims (could be FUD spreading?) that certain folks in bitcoin and companies have more influence on bitcoin than others.  

I think that a lot of the hype that is made to attempt to criticize bitcoin in that centralization direction tends to be attempts to pump some other coin or sometimes merely attempts to weaken bitcoin in various regards, that have largely been unsuccessful.  

The proof of work versus proof of stake is one of those misleading areas in order to attempt to criticize bitcoin for its core power, which is the proof of work resolution of the byzantine general's problem.  That is a BIG ASS resolution and a BIG ass feature in bitcoin that should be appreciated for its power... the power of computing that has been created around bitcoin is difficult to replicate in any other coin, and attempting to move the conversations to some other bullshit is merely signs of admission that it is almost impossible to compete against bitcoin on that level and to attempt to steal the mining power, including the incentives built around mining bitcoin.

Bitcoin has gotten through a decent number of significant, and even increasing attacks, some of which are tied to FUD spreading and attempted social attacks and others are the forkenings and various dilution attempts, and yeah, of course the segwit2x and the bcash forkening of bitcoin in August 2017 were largely built around attempts to make bitcoin easier to change (on a governance level) - and assertions that bitcoin's difficulties to be changed were hinderances upon bitcoin rather than actual features of bitcoin.  So good thing that some of those attacks were not successful to change bitcoin's governance in order to have had made bitcoin easier to change because right now we would likely be looking at a much less resilient bitcoin (that had no teeth), if the code could just be changed based on the whims of a large and vocal group of then whiners, even a mere majority of supposed concerned people (referring to the purported future proofing scaling concerns of bitcoin).
Reply
#94
(10-05-2019, 06:10 AM)Nulled Wrote: All fair and good responses. I'm not a expert by any means, and I don't have some of the resources that these guys are investing into the ETH project overall.

I have been told that I have good intuition, it's saved my ass several times already. Simply put I cannot trust Vitalik Buterin.

[Image: Vitalik-Buterin-555x370.jpg]


Yes, some of that judgement is coming from this "look."

[1]  Is this the look of a genius? Some people think so, he is no doubtedly intelligent, but I simply am doubting that he has capability as a leader, and "cementing" the ETH project.

I've seen alot of these nerds and geeks. But this guy strikes me as the most unstable one I've seen.

Hate to re-hash an issue. I see you guys have already talked about this in detail.

Don't take any advice from me but I just can't get behind someone who can't even wear a hoodie or fix his hair.

Conversely, with Bitcoin, there is nobody to get behind. It's decentralized. And that's why It's here to stay.


[1] You're just jealous you're not as handsome [Image: smile.png]

Interesting perspective, but I get a totally different read on Vitalik. Strange guy for sure but hearing him on podcasts and seeing him in interviews, he seems too stable and almost robotic.

At any rate, he has a good deal of influence but the project is not just about him. There have been proposals he's made that were rejected by the community.



[2] So yeah both projects are decentralized and have no central point of control, no central point of failure.

The word you're hinting at here in what you wrote is 'immutable' or 'change resistant' and Bitcoin has a stronger record on that front.

But this cuts both ways...

Change resistance combined with Bitcoin's inherent limitations (i.e. slow and not programmable) is the reason devs + enterprises have largely moved to other blockchains to create things of value beyond simple peer 2 peer transactions.
Reply
#95
'Ethereum is a scam' narrative ringing more hollow by the day. Cool

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has deemed Ether a commodity (and therefore not a security). This means that Ether, the digital currency, is now open for derivative trading and other types of financialization but will not be subject to the morass of compliance, regulation, scrutiny, and red tape required for trading securities.  

A similar declaration happened quite while ago already with Bitcoin in 2015, and it's good to see regulatory agencies are showing a progressive tendency on this front, lending more credibility to crypto as an asset class while not burdening it regulatory encumbrances.
Reply
#96
I am not an expert on Crypto by any means, but as one with some measure of experience with financial crimes, the IRS has already begun it's pre-prosecution phase of warning known crypto owners via letter to report their taxable capital gains as required by law.

In addition, all Crypto exchanges that do business in the USA are now required register with the US Treasury's FINCEN protocols which reports certain transactions to the US Treasury for anti-money laundering and anti-tax evasion efforts.  Even if there is no laundering going on, the IRS uses peoples' lack of reporting to prosecute them for not reporting capital gains.

I am all for Crypto in terms of a new asset allocation tool for investing.  But the laws and regulations are catching up so that it is not so useful as a privacy tool any longer.  Even if you use overseas exchanges only, you would be breaking the law simply by not reporting it which could culminate in your prosecution and seizure of assets.

Governments do not hate Crypto because they can tax it.  But as soon as they figure out ways to catch the non-reporting of capital gains, they will start prosecuting and seizing where they can.  

There will be two things that I will look for as bombshells which regard to Crypto.  First, if the US Treasury decides to include the mere holding of overseas Crypto as annually reportable on the infamous FBAR reports, all hell will break loose.   Second, I will look for the FATCA law to be amended to include overseas crypto exchanges to be mandated to report Americans who have holdings as that law already requires for foreign banks.  Again, all hell will break loose.

At that point, serious Crypto holders should renounce US citizenship in favor of a country that does not have these ridiculous reporting requirements that wait for you to slip up so they can seize and prosecute.

The financial police state is here folks, but let's stay tuned to see how this plays out.
Favorite Countries:  Finland, Latvia, Ukraine, Serbia, Montenegro, Georgia, Japan, Argentina.

Countries For Future Travel:  Norway, Sweden, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bosnia, Macedonia, Moldova, Uzbekistan.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)