/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>52287285
Who cares?

who?

>>52287285
>every
no, only those that did the fund my dev ops shit
so everyone beside btc

>>52287285
Not my congress bro

>>52287300
>>52287313

US courts often use cases against these small companies as paving stones to enact some greater policy. If crypto billionaires are smart they'd better hire the fuck out of every capable lawyer in town.

>>52287285
Why is XRP v SEC taking so long lol?

>>52287285
LBRY is a 2016 project and they were really dumb with what they said and did. Every modern coin has complicated schemes to avoid triggering these regulations.

>>52287313
It's only Devs who talk about token price, aka most of them except for eth, link and a few others

>>52287285
What did you expect from (((congress)))

>>52287350
I know, why New Hampshire though? Always symbolism in those little court decisions
>>52287461
Read the entire doc.
Expressions like Sergeys "value holding container" without ever mentioning price publicly is going to be enough; and the acts of pretty much every preminning dev, let alone icolers that kept significant portions of their token to "ensure the growth of the network" are fucked. Its over. The language is clear

>>52287285
Only cryptos with a pre-mine or ICO are considered securities. The future top 3 will be BTC, DOGE and XMR.

>>52287553
read again. LBRY never had an ico

>>52287566
It had a pre-mine.

>>52287655
yes. And it kept significant amounts of tokens to use to "ensure the growth of the network" and therefore giving "investors" the impression of those tokens increasing in value as a result of the core devs engagement. Everyone, and literally everyone since ltc went this route, is fucked

>>52287548
Never heard Sergey call the link token a value holding container, think you're confused or didn't understand the context, otherwise please link where he has said anything about possible financial benifits of holding link

>>52287404
I would be surprised if Gensler says any coin inst a security. He think stable coins are.

>>52287772
Video from late 2020. I archived it locally

>>52287313
>>52287461
This.

>>52287350
You're a moron, stop posting.

>>52287461
Chainlink 100% led people to view it as an investment. This isn't looking good for you.

>>52287797
>t-trust me bro

>>52287812
source pls lel
In fact, Chainlink famously made it a point to never discuss the token price, or even allow such discussion on its official chat platforms.

>>52287808
no its not just devs that talk about token prices
The entire document indicates that the decison was taken on the base of devs signaling that they use their pre-minned tokens to grow the network and therefore lead to investors believeing that the action of a third party will make the token value go up

>>52287688
>Everyone, and literally everyone since ltc went this route, is fucked
Yes, this is why I said the future top 3 will be BTC, DOGE and XMR. Because those are the only three proof of work coins I know without a pre-mine. LTC also had no pre-mine, I think. But Charlie Lee has definitely led on investors in the past and he sold the picotop in 2017. That warrants an investigation in my book.

>>52287854
>on the base of devs signaling that they use their pre-minned tokens to grow the network
No, it was on the basis of devs signaling that the token value was going to go up.

You have no reading comprehension.

>>52287461
Eth is in so much shit it isn't funny. Lubin and Hinman will be fall guys.

>>52287855
doge. sorry lad, the original core devs did the same and then abandonend project, also a security

>>52287812
He literally went well out of his way to do the opposite

>>52287875
you are huffing hopium, lay down the pipe

>>52287772
You know, maybe him never talking about price action was a really good thing for us.

>>52287880
The dev abandonment is true yeah. Don't know if they instamined coins though. If I check posts from 5+ years ago the consensus is that there wasn't an instamine or pre-mine. Also, not having an active dev is probably a positive for them, since that makes it more difficult for the SEC to go after someone.

>>52287285
>every crypto is a security
Wrong, follow established securities law and don't have your defense to not following it be 'we didn't follow the law, but the SEC never enforced it so it's not fair'

Bitcoin will be fine, Chia will be fine, and I'm sure others out there will be fine. A fuckton of the space will get fucked though and I'm gonna laugh my ass off when XRP loses to the SEC and ICO-based Proof of Stake coins all get fucked

>>52287893
you don't use a pipe to huff, retard

>>52287893
You're a literal retard.
Pic very related, the original SEC complaing.
They got assreamed because they literally told people the token price would go up.
This is exactly what XRP did.

Link never did anything like this.

>>52287797
Kek, yeah sure, please go and dig into your dusty archives and upload this evidence

>>52287855
Premines have nothing to do with being a security or not.
The only thing that matters is did the devs tell people the coin/token price will go up.

>>52287993
yeah you are just trying to ignore the parts that dont support your narrative
the entire doc is relevant
not just those supporting your investement in an unregistered security
https://odysee.com/@lbry:3f/secvslbrysummaryjudgementruling:a

>>52287993
>>52288021
Lbry lost as well because they didn't have a working product out when the coin was released. That covers majority of crypto. If ripple loses crypto is done for.

>>52288042
>you are just trying to ignore the parts that dont support your narrative
I'm not ignoring a goddamn thing.
The LBRY devs LITERALLY told people their token price would go up (as the network grows etc.).
This is the key to the Howey Test.

Cope.

>>52288045
That has nothing to do with anything.

>>52287993
lmao
Gonna be hilarious when Ripple wins (re settles extremely favorably).
There is no contract. A security is literally a contract.
This is SEC desperation to set some precedent ahead of their basically losing to Ripple.

>>52288074
Did XRShit do that

>>52288045
>If ripple loses crypto is done for.

Crypto isn't done for, it'll strengthen the position of any blockchains left over after the great purging from American exchanges

>>52288045
has nothing to do with it.
Their statements to use the funds to grow the network as the core devs that pre minned the shit, broke their net

Tell me one dev with dev wallet that didnt say anything in that regard and made investors expect that the toekn price would rise due to the third party using those token

>>52288085
Absolutely, see pic.

>>52288083
>There is no contract. A security is literally a contract.
Please pull your head out of your ass, where's the "contract" in LBRY's case?

>>52288074
The Howey test says among other things that the price is dependent SOLELY on the efforts of those selling it.
It also says that the investment must be a COMMON ENTERPRISE.

I am a businessman that does international settlements and cc settlements monthly to the tune of $30,000-50,000.
The fees of these services run me around $3,000 a month depending.
I don't need the price of XRP to go up to profit. I can save the entire $3,000/m just by using the basically fee-less XRPL to transfer my money.
I am not dependent on Ripple to profit from it's use.
Literally nothing applies to XRP the way the SEC claims it does.
LBRY is a pawn, but it won't work.

>>52288159
See immediately below.
The HT determines if it is a contract supposedly. However it's all subjective and everyone knows it.
LBRY is the last bit of fud. Ripple has killed the SEC if you've followed the case. The odds the "lose" is almost 0.
The odds the settle favorably is very high. "Winning" invites appeal and years more in legal battle.

>>52288189
*below your comment here >>52288160 I meant of course.

>>52288092
>Tell me one dev with dev wallet that didnt say anything in that regard and made investors expect that the toekn price would rise due to the third party using those token
Chainlink.

>>52288160
>>52288189
XRP told people the price would go up.
They fucked up in the exact same way LBRY did.
The SEC complaints against both Ripple and LBRY even go over the Howey test literally step by step; with the relevant "prong" being the third one:

LBRY:
Investment Contract Third Prong: LBC Holders Reasonably Expected a Profit from LBRY's Efforts

Ripple:
Ripple Led Investors to Reasonably Expect a Profit from Their Investment Derived from Defendants’ Efforts

It's time to open your eyes.

>>52288159
>underlines just one of the four requirements
Needs all 4.
>demand goes up and price goes up
Applies to literally everything and says "should" not "will"
>XRP...only digital asset with clear...use case
Yea, and the XRPL was done and ready. UNLIKE what you specifically said about LBRY not having a product. Your "evidence" against is actually evidence FOR.
>STABLE or strengthening
Literally everything as they print money non stop

>>52288267
But I didn't and don't.
You haven't followed the case. Ripple has the emails dude.
This isn't fucking la di da land pie in the sky shit.
It's political intrigue.
THEY HAVE THE EMAILS.

>>52288280
>>underlines just one of the four requirements
>Needs all 4.
The others apply to literally anything that is sold to people.

>Applies to literally everything
Yes, but you can't tell people "we will make efforts to make the price go up in the future".

>>52288303
You're in HARD denial.
The very nanosecond when you say anything that remotely looks like "I will try to make the price of my token go up", you are failing the Howey test.

>>52288160
If you actually read the judgement you’d see that the definition of “solely” is not literal

>>52288326
Common enterprise applies to anything?
I am in COMMON ENTERPRISE with Ripple?
They don't know who I am. We have no contract or paperwork at all. They've never met me.
>can't tell people price will go up
Sorry, you can sweaty. People do it all the time. Selective enforcement is getting ass reamed by Ripple and the SEC will be crippled forever.
>>52288326
>very second...
Only for sycophantic, SEC dick sucking faggots.

The XRPL was DONE AND FINISHED AND OPERATING OUTSIDE THE CONTROL OF RIPPLE.
Them saying they want the price to go up is the exact same as me saying the price of toilet paper or gasoline will go up.
It's not dependent on anyone in particular.

That's the argument.
Now, since you suck government dick so hard, when it turns out I am correct...you will then change your mind to be in line with the governments again right?

>>52288267
>1.5 Trillion dollar of derivatives
>Hey guys we pay our people in """one of a kind"""
>We grow the network
>Sorry no entry only kyc nodes whitelisted by core devs
Chainlink is so fucked. There strategy went backward with this judgement.

>>52288356
>if you let the SEC pick and choose their definitions to mean whatever they want then they win
Yes.
However, the key distinction in this particular area would be that LBRY didn't have a finished product.
So...all profit can pretty safely be argued to be dependent on LBRY finishing their product and et.
THE XRPL WAS DONE AND FINISHED AND NOT EVEN UNDER THE CONTROL OF RIPPLE.

xrp shizos lol. If you bet on xrp winning after this you are more retarded than the link fags

>>52288400
It's very simple, the SEC cases against XRP and LBRY go over each point of the Howey Test.
You simply DO NOT tell people "I will try to make the price of my product go up" if you don't want your shit to be deemed a security.
This has been the golden rule for 80 years.

>>52288402
That's Sergey shilling the network, not the token price.
Never the token price.

Holding XRP now seems like a really good investment. Ripple is smartly using howey/investment contract defence and not the fair notice defence that Library was using

>>52288427
The definition was chosen by the judge, baggie

>>52288462
>This has been the golden rule for 80 years.
Suck dick harder chud.
What's your point in WANTING this to be the case?
Why?
Because your BETTERS are telling you this?
Because you LOVE authority?

This also assumes, A BIG ASSUMPTION, that an off hand reddit comment counts as a contractual agreement?
How big a stretch is that and WHY WHY WHY do you want it to be so?

Literally they have a single reddit comment.
You have lost and so have they.

>>52288462
doesnt matter. The judgement isnt what I expected but the language is clear, its not about blabla token price, its about emitting token, keeping them to fund the network signaling that the core devs that minted the tokens are working to create more value using their funds

>>52288512
>it was chosen by ANOTHER government employee dummy!
No chance it's wrong then I guess. Infallible as they are and all.
kek

Ripple has the emails. That is enough leverage.
Even if I wanted to suck government dick and give way to their specious arguments...that's NOT how it works.
It's all strong arming and game theory tactics.
Ripple won.

There is a reason SEC employees are jumping ship.

>>52288400
>>52288515
>We have no contract or paperwork at all.
"For purposes of the Securities Act, an investment contract (undefined by the Act) means a contract, transaction, or scheme"
t. SCOTUS anno 1946.

>>52288534
>its not about blabla token price
It literally is.

>>52288590
I love how shitcoin devs try to defend their scams.
Money printing is over no matter how words are going to be minced. Next xrp and then its over for shitcoin casino

>>52287313
>so everyone beside btc
Anon, I-

>>52287313
It's just...

>>52288655
>namefag
gtfo twitter nigger

>>52287404
>Every modern coin has complicated schemes to avoid triggering these regulations.
uwot?

>>52287285
While the market is dumping, I have been aping in on Loop by staking the hot thing and making up to 5000% passive income

>>52288680
>gtfo twitter nigger
If only you knew how bad things really are.

>>52287285
What is the point of all this? What problem are these cryptocurrencies solving?

>>52288629
"expectation of profit from the efforts of the seller" is invariably the absolute key to any case the SEC brings against cryptos.

>>52288698
Not that I know of about Cosmos, Juno or Evmos and Osmosis. To talk-less of Loop Finance

>>52288775
Once crypto is marked legal open season, do you think that will lead to stonks getting the nerf-bat too?
>crypto-meme-stonks are just too fucking OP desusenpaichan

>>52288846
Stonks are already securities.
And it's not open season on anything but coins whose devs told people "we'll try and make the price go up".

>>52287285
>deem every cryptocurrency as securities
They are securities, though. What's the problem?

>>52288571
>1946
And you are finally getting to the point of what is happening but you are too normie to understand.

>>52288965
It means nothing changed since Howey in 1946; not the definition of "security" or "investment contract", not the elements of the Howey test, ... NOTHING.
Ripple should've known that telling people "we'll make the token price go up" makes XRP a security, because the standard for "security" was set over 60 years before Ripple was created.

>>52288957
kek
This is the other thing the "ITSASEKURIY!" shills don't seem to get.
It literally doesn't even matter.
Ripple is only even in court for it's initial sales.
The court and SEC have already ceded that all other sales public or private were not sales of securities as they could not possibly have been.

1/1000 Ripple loses = they pay a fine and the price of XRP goes up anyway because it's an extremely useful tool.

>>52289011
The only cryptos the SEC has ever slapped as securities, are ones that literally told their buyers "we'll make efforts to make the token price go up".
That's because it's pretty much impossible to directly prove the "expectation of profits from the efforts of the seller" part of the Howey test if they don't literally say that shit.

>GUISE I FOLLOWED THE CASE RIPPLE IS WINNING, HINMAN EMAILS ETH IS DONE FOR AHAHAHA
>actually I'm an illiterate mouthbreathing midwit and by "following the case" I mean I'm really just parroting whatever bullshit copium that bagholding retard youtube celebrity lawyer is shoving down my throat

>>52289138

Yeah the only real people who are posting about 'following the case' are XRP holders who will tint everything in Ripple's favor

>>52288810
True, that's not fair of me to say they're all equally "guilty" of the same things.

>>52288866
>And it's not open season on anything but coins whose devs told people "we'll try and make the price go up"
I wouldn't be surprised if other coins started getting Legal notices though, even if "just for show".
I understand that they're kind of "unofficially-officially" sanctioned by pretty much everyone around the world.

looks like this wasn't the real reason for the dumping afterall OP

>>52289331
>I wouldn't be surprised if other coins started getting Legal notices though, even if "just for show".
I absolutely would.

When a coin's devs literally tell people "we'll make efforts to make the price go up", then it's a cinch to prove in court that buyers had "expectation of profit from the efforts of the seller".
There's really no other way to definitively prove expectation of profit if this part is missing.

>>52289081
>a reddit comment is this happening
That's a pretty weak case. We'll see broheem.
Either way. Price of XRP goes up. Which is the total irony of the situation.

>>52289559
The platform on which the comments are made doesn't matter in the slightest lmao
What matters is who's talking and who's listening.

And there's more than Reddit in there.

>>52289559
>Either way. Price of XRP goes up.
Unless they can't trade XRP on American exchanges

>>52288957
where do they get the funds to pay the fine. a yes, dump their now registered securities, oh exchange wash trading, sorry those dont touch securities

>>52289583
It's literally gone up since they were delisted from CB.
>>52289580
>user JOELKATZ said your honor...
At this point it's almost like you are being paid.
No one actually sucks government dick this much.

>>52288673
There is nothing more retarded than a fucking /pol/ infographic. Imagine reading this seriously. Imagine making this shit. For /pol/ retards this is some kind of academic paper- I want to both laugh, and throw up and how horrifying that is. Fucking dumb fucks.

>>52289637
>>user JOELKATZ said your honor...
Yes.
You do know who he is right?

And it's not just him, and it's not just on Reddit.

>>52289583
Also, and please see this post as it's not a hypothetical. It is literally me. >>52288160

It's not going to matter. I just need clarity as to what I'm sending around the world.
I don't need an exchange to send or receive XRP.
/biz/ness men have never done actual business is the worst part here.
It will happen regardless. Ripple has made a fucking shit ton of money outside the US the past 2 years.
They BUY XRP ON THE OPEN MARKET even for their ODL sometimes.
AKA - they themselves are betting the price moons.

>>52289688
>You do know who he is right?
Checked. Of course.
But not when I first bought XRP. Nor was I aware of his commentary.

Look, why do you insist so much?
Let's play a game.
Is it possible that ONLY the initial sales were securities?
And that after that, XRP sales on the open market were not?
Then how do you account for it all post facto?

I want to hear your thoughts. Not just screeching about how much SEC dick you love.

>>52289559
>reddit comment
People get thrown in prison for securities fraud over things they say in private, let alone on massive public platforms like reddit.
Stop posting.

>>52287854
>The entire document indicates that the decison was taken on the base of devs signaling that they use their pre-minned tokens to grow the network and therefore lead to investors believeing that the action of a third party will make the token value go up

yeah... why the fuck else would you buy any of these worthless cryptos? people only buy it because they think the price will go up

>>52289748
>why do you insist so much?
Because people like OP and you are implying that if Ripple eats shit, the rest of crypto is next.
And that's simply a big fat lie.

>>52289756
>stop posting
You'd love that. kek
The only evidence the SEC or this thread has presented is a HYPOTHETICAL presented in a single post on reddit from over five years ago.

If it's such strong evidence, why is the case two years old?
Why did the judge order emails handed over?
I'm just wondering WHY...WHY...if it's so simple...WHY?

>>52288548
>Ripple has the emails.
Maybe instead of bouncing from conspiracy to conspiracy you should focus on getting your life back on track.

>>52289081
https://twitter.com/attorneyjeremy1/status/1589648168806887425
Sec will go after anyone that sold a coin before they had a working product.

>>52289777
Checked, but I never said a single thing about anyone or anything else being fucked.
Literally not a word.

Now, answer the question.
Is it POSSIBLE that only INITIAL sales were securities and that private sales after the fact by exchanges and private persons not associated with Ripple were not?

>le reddit comment rolf lmao
the absolute state of xrp morons
gtfo and go suck Hogan's dick you imbecile

>>52289802
Why did a judge order the emails handed over?
Why did the judge not categorically reject Ripple's conspiracy that there was something worthwhile in the emails?
Why?

>>52287285
>we're dumping
lmao this post didn't age well.
I guess america and its gaytarded regulators are not really relevant.

>>52289827
>the person who responds to such a weak point is a moron but the person who uses that as his SOLE evidence is smart

>>52289806
No, the SEC is going after anyone who told people "we'll make efforts to make the price go up".
i.e. any crypto that fails the Howey test.

>>52289816
You're implying it by denying what the SEC cases are about.

>>52289799
>HYPOTHETICAL
Nothing hypothetical about the public statements made by Ripple on various public platforms.

>a single post on reddit
And the Ripple website, and Bitcoin Forum, etc.

>>52289799
LBRY just lost their case because of comments they made on social media and their website.

>>52289879
Haha that's not the howey test buddy.

>>52289879
His statement is literally worded as a hypothetical.
It does not even state the price will go up.
Just that Ripple wants the price up.
I know reading is hard. But lawyers have parsed language for forever.
He says they want to sell XRP at a high price.
That is not a promise of raising prices.
I know you want it to be. And it DOES NOT include third parties at all.
>implied third party
Yea, buyers of a product. It's literally a product. With a set use. In completed form when you purchase it.

STILL YOU WON'T ANSWER!!
Please. Either you are paid to shill, or you give a thoughtful answer.
IS IT POSSIBLE, that Ripple, Brad, David, and Jed ALL are guilty of selling unregistered securities???
But ALSO that sales thereafter by private parties and exchanges were not?

Because as I've stated. I don't care. I am going to use the XRPL and XRP exactly as intended regardless.
I happen to think they settle and win, but I realize it's not really a thing that matters much.

>>52289925
No. It's because they didn't have a finished product and by extrapolation...no one could profit AT ALL unless LBRY finished their product and that means people relied on them for profit.

THE XRPL WAS COMPLETELY FINISHED FOR NEARLY FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO RIPPLE'S COMMENTS.

They had a working PRODUCT.

>lelelel I can bullshit my way out with my superior semantic mental gymabstics
>Just that Ripple wants the price up
boom, security, thanks for playing you fucking moron

>>52290063
If everything is a security then nothing is retard.
This definition makes all silver sales securities.
All home sales...securities.
Etc.

Everyone wants the price of everything to go up all the time. This is not a point.
This is without a doubt a low IQ shill brigade.

>>52289958
>>52290051
There is nothing in the Howey test that says anything about a product not being finished yet.
The Howey test is about people buying things, and then the seller telling them "I'll make the price go up".

It's actually pretty concerning how delusional you are.

>>52290093
>If everything is a security
Only the projects whose devs told people "we'll make the price go up".

>>52290100
There are 4 pronges total. You need more than just 1.
If your going on just 1 then as >>52290093 says everything is a security.

>tfw no CEO/bully pulpit
>tfw no "foundation" (company)
>ftw no marketing budget
>tfw no one to sue
>tfw I would just laugh even if it was declared a security unlike the baggies that know it's all over for their """""decentralized""""" project and their personal fincances if it gets declared a security

>>52290100
How stupid are you? Still not answering my question. Why are avoiding it?
Is it not pertinent?

The finished XRPL means I, and other buyers, are not solely or even partially dependent on Ripple for the price to go up.
It means, as I posted originally, that with NO EFFORT OF RIPPLE AT ALL, I can save 8% of my money on cc and settlement fees for cross border payments and even domestic payments.

The price can be .44 FOREVER and it does not stop me from gaining using the XRPL.
I was not, am not, nor was anyone else, EVER, dependent on Ripple for anything.

LBRY having no such thing means people were necessarily dependent on them.
If the XRPL didn't exist and they sold XRP, then I would immediately agree with you that people were depending on Ripple for price appreciation.
But...that's not what happened.

>>52290116
Yea, so silver sales and home sales right?
And CNBC is guilty of collaborating on securities fraud in home sales?
I'm just wondering where you think it stops..

STILL WON'T ANSWER.

>>52289386
>"we'll make efforts to make the price go up"
>There's really no other way to definitively prove expectation of profit if this part is missing.
For all we know, they unironically just did some candle-lighting, monotone-chanting, while performing some esoteric /x/-ritual, to try and pray for Line Go Up.
I kind of doubt that's what your situation is referring to, but these days- sometimes it's hard to tell.

>>52289592
What fine?

>>52287548
So we pay the sec there measly fine and then we are a security on the blockchain

Dare I say it? Based

>>52290143
>There are 4 pronges total.
Yes, the first two (investment of money, common enterprise) apply to pretty much anything that is sold to people.
The last two (expectation of profit from the efforts of the promoter) applies to projects that tell their buyers "we'll make the price go up".

>>52290158
The point is the XRP devs sold tokens while telling the buyers "we'll make the price go up".

>>52290176
Precious metal futures, certificates, ETFs, funds, ... are all securities in the eyes of the SEC.

>home sales
You're actually selling land, not contracts for proceeds from that land (as was the case in Howey).

>>52290294
It's about telling buyers that you'll make the price go up.

>>52290376
Look up what happened to Enigma after they settled.

>>52290376
>and then we are a security on the blockchain

That's not a net positive if you want institutional adoption. That's an extra barrier for large corps to think about if they wanted to pick a blockchain to do work on

>>52290143
>You need more than just 1
Lol no. You pass the Howey test if you pass one of them. Howey test is something you want to fail btw.

>>52290176
Are you retarded? A piece of silver and a house individual items only their owner can control. Your shitcoin is controlled by insiders (that are probably billionaires at this point from dumping on you). They can fork it, update it, do whatever they want with it and you have to take it or sell your bags to a bigger idiot. They also have a marketing team, lawyers, accountants, CEOs, etc. In other words, your shitcoin doesn't exist without the COMMON ENTERPRISE I just described propping it up unlike my house or PMs.

>>52287285
>SEC
>Congress
Who?

>>52290534
What is the extra barrier

>>52287368
The sec have requested extensions for two years now.
They were desperately looking for something to save them as evident through what they filed and how their claims have changed repeatedly on things like the Hinaman speech and whether or not it was policy or just his opinion.
They finally have the end of SEC vs LBRY to use as ammunition but Ripple still has plenty to work with such as over ten amicus briefs among a ton of previous rulings (mentioned in their documents) and more. There’s a lot riding on the case not just for Ripple but for other cryptos in the US, especially with Gensler the kike claiming just about every crypto is a security.
Then there are the fudders too retarded to read a few PDFs who keep using shit submitted by the sec at the beginning of this case and ignoring everything afterwards.

>>52287285
>every crypto is a security
Literally what Michael Saylor has been telling everyone for months.

>>52287285
>not bitcoin
it was always gonna happen. seethe, cope and HFSP.

>>52291164
>>every crypto is a security
>Literally what Michael Saylor has been telling everyone for months.

He's a based nigger. But he never told is about stablecoins. Holding or farming them through aggregators like Spool fetches more big bags. He hoard this sensitive information....

>>52287368
The SEC has no strong arguments, but as it is a government entity, they are privileged to extend the case as far as they can.

>>52291164
Gensler says stable coins are also securities. Bye bye tether.

Can someone explain what the significance is in US law to be treated like a security? What does this change for the company?

>>52291681
Crypto companies move to Singapore as they have guidelines for crypto. The US becomes a third world country because it's left behind in the 1940s global money system.

>>52291681
US-based exchanges won't be able to trade unregistered securities which will make a big hit to who is able to buy a crypto coin, as well as potentially giving cold feet to potential institutional investors

so basically to summarize, Chainlink is most definitely a security

Are my nintendo 64 cartridges, pokemon cards and $50 bill considered securities?

Simple solution: move your corporation or company maintaining the blockchain out of America.

There are plenty of other alternatives out there and if burgers want to get behind the crypto currency industry, I think we should respect their will to become poor, de-industrialized, less free and more dependent on authorities that despise them to the core.

The US will just become outmatched when it comes to the topic of development and economy in the future, that's all.

Happens all the time in history, don't be surprised.

Well DOT seems to believe they’re not.

>>52290423
Physical silver is not a security.

>>52292640
I wonder who is part of the web3 foundation, most companies say working with the sec is very hard.
Oh surprise.. Ethereum Project.

>>52292640
>We were a security, but now we're totally not
This is so fucking stupid

>>52292791
They said precious metal futures

>>52291731
The US will lag behind the rest of the world because of this. They are shooting themselves in the kneel, repeatedly, with a cheap PSA ar15 with a D-50 drummag it seems. The muzzle brake blast is shredding their pants and socks. The IR-Laser is almost out of batteries and it's starting to rain
>>52292459
Most definitely, especially the n64 cartridges

Jews are going to fuck us like pigs

>>52292525
I dont get it. Why does it matter if the company is in America or not? Cant the SEC still declare cryptos as securities when the founders are based overseas (with America excluded from their ICO as securities)? For example by forcing american CEXes to delist them?

Or can the SEC only declare something a security when the blockchain company is based in the US?

>>52292806
what else do you expect from cs failures
>Hey guys em we are not a security
>please fund our devops
>no bank would

>>52293538
For starters, not having to deal with the shady SEC is a great boon.

Secondly, the US cannot ban a blockchain nor can it do anything about it.
We have things like VPNs out there and to think that you ban a blockchain at all is just laughable.

LBRY and Odysee wasted years with time dealing with the SEC, for example.
Instead, they could've just established themselves out of the USA and made a lot more money and progress altogether.

By what I have seen, this is just a problem because the US is making things difficult for the crypto sector, while the rest of the world (with some exceptions) fully embraces the new concept.

>>52292847
But they said that on purpose to make it not the same thing.
XRP is akin to silver in this example.
No one is talking about XRP futures CONTRACTS.
It's a joke if you actually think that's the same.

Silver dealers and real estate agents claim the price will go up all the time. This does not make it a security.
If there was a FUCKING CONTRACT then yes.

>>52295530
Yeah. When in the 1990 USA was banning encryption, some projects like OpenSSH (I think?) relocated to Canada and guess what, eventually USA kneeled to nerdchads.
You can swap to whatever "security" you want by using one of many no KYC crypto-crypto swaps thought VPN/Tor. Is buying an undeclared security even illegal?
>the US is making things difficult for the crypto sector, while the rest of the world (with some exceptions) fully embraces the new concept.
That's a bit too optimistic. Much of the world is just as cucked, except they have less power generally.

>>52292791
Silver is not a fucking financial instrument, it's literally a metal.

>>52287285
Pretty much this is over for most of crypto. Every team has said one thing or another about their product that could be misconstrued as selling a security.
SEC wants to go all in on this and destroy any alt-tech.

>>52287993
Those quotes are fucking hilarious because they aren't actually quotes. The SEC is just putting [] wherever they feel it should be so they can have a case.
>product grows and does well
>value increases
HAH THAT MEANS ITS A SECURITY!!!!
It wasn't talking about the cryptocurrency, but the network and technology behind it, specifically the odysee platform.

This is all fucking stupid and preparation for something apocalyptical.

>>52298031
>Every team has said one thing or another about their product that could be misconstrued as selling a security.
Thank god Chia Inc went in with the assumption that the SEC was going to fuck every single crypto up the butt for potentially being an unregistered security. No coin sales at all (if ever, otherwise they'll just potentially do dividends) until they're a public tnr4xentity

>>52287285
>Literally who of crypto.
K, thx, bye.

>>52287808
Wow what an original and well thought out post, truly you're trying your hardest to make the best posts.

>>52287285
*digital asset security
Hester Pierce's Safe Harbor 2.0 regulations will be implemented and a new entity created to administer digital assets, composed of the SEC DoT CFTC and OCC and maybe Fed idk
https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/peirce-statement-token-safe-harbor-proposal-2.0

>>52291681
then their crypto-tokens could only be sold to registered investors, like stocks

>>52289559
>>52289748
>>52289707
>>52289879
>>52296149
I told you to get out at 60c. Was called a shill.
I told you to get out at 50c. Was called a pajeet.
I told you to get out at 40c. Was called a FUD Jew.
I told you to get out at 30c. Some retard posted some Trump picture and said "trust the plan".
I'm telling you again at 40c to get the fuck out of this coin.
It's going to 0c. The SEC have got Ripple bang to rights because they bragged about their scam in internal emails.
Stop thinking the whole world is in on some retard conspiracy and save your money while you can.
On Xmas Day 2020 I said that some Anons are going to rope over this and that you needed to get out. Yet there are still people here with the "everybody is fudding" mentality two years later. Nobody is fudding, we're trying to save your money for you. Get the fuck out of XRP. It's never coming back.

>>52296435
>That's a bit too optimistic. Much of the world is just as cucked, except they have less power generally.

Well, yeah you're not wrong.

Thing is: upholding financial laws outside of a first world country is a challenge.

Many, many countries do not succeed at all.

This has been a major advantage of first world countries over third worlds for decades, but I see the opposite with third world countries.

If they can't apply the law, then that is in itself enough.

Many times, they don't even have the legislation or capable personnel to even handle common financial fraud, such as bank stuff.

Doesn't have to be explicit promise of gains based on what the judge said. Could be implicit. Devs issue token. Sell some keep most for themselves. That alone gives the implication to token buyers they are going to do work to pump the price. That's why Cripple, Link and all the other crypto scams where the devs created their own money and gave it most of it to themselves are also fucked

>>52290026
bruh, every bagholder in xrp containment thread bought into the idea that ripple was gonna flip a switch and make xrp 2k.

xrp is a security.

>>52288160
you may be using xrp for what it's meant for. but 99.9% of xrp bagholders are hodling expecting to be millionaires eoy because they fell for twitter 4chan larpers.

also you can literally use any low transfer fee crypto for your use case.

https://twitter.com/joelkatz/status/932748963526066178?lang=en

for how smart people claims he is. he sure dumb as hell on twitter

>>52287404
>complicated schemes
Like what? Any literature recommendations?

>token with 0 utility at launch that team holds some for themselves while promising it will have utility and value later
Yeah this is definitely why the market is dumping, not because the 3rd biggest exchange just became insolvent

Chainlink is literally king made you dumb niggers. They were in bed with SWIFT long before ICO. The only cryptos at risk are the ones who didn't get the OK from the elite prior to launch.

>>52287313
btc is dead though