Just observing what people are saying, the amount of misinformation being passed around is bonkers.
I don't WANT these exchanges to fail if they are operating the right way, but what do people think would happen if everyone went to their bank and wanted to withdraw everything in 1 day? People, including some in this thread are making zero attempt to understand what is happening, but it doesn't stop them from tweeting out 'get your funds off of Crypto.com nNWOOW!!ZZZ.'
Its insane.
The federal reserve would cover the banks, that's pretty much what 2008 was, at a cost of 500 billion to the taxpayer, hence me not wanting regulation for crypto, what regulation actually means is federally back insurance
The federal reserve would cover the banks, that's pretty much what 2008 was, at a cost of 500 billion to the taxpayer, hence me not wanting regulation for crypto, what regulation actually means is federally back insurance
Total bank deposits in the US are $11.7 trillion.
In the Canada I think it is around $5 trillion.
Nobody is covering that.
The government would be forced to stop the withdrawals.
I have to agree with this to a degree. The "Currency" part of Cryptocurrency is an unmitigated ####show.
Blockchain technologies however are where the work is occurring and as I've stated multiple times in the past in this thread, where we will see "quiet" adoption as time goes on. ZK Proofs are 100% one of the most important technologies that is just getting started and will be a huge boon to personal identity proofing while maintaining anonymity in the future.
Agreed.
And as I said before, blockchain is a tool (like the internet), but an investment.
Banks aren't a great comparable to exchanges. Their function is totally different than crypto exchanges and they're heavily regulated. Because of that, they're allowed to only have a portion of their holdings held in reserve, which allows them to lend money out.
A better comparable would be a brokerage firm. For those, customer cash is required to be segregated into separate accounts from the brokerage's own funds. And any securities held by customers are owned by the customer, not the brokerage. So in the event that the brokerage becomes insolvent, the customer still owns the underlying security.
So given that crypto exchanges are more like brokerage firms than banks, if they were run properly there's no reason they shouldn't be able to handle people withdrawing crypto. Any more than Interactive Brokers shouldn't be able to handle someone transferring their Apple stock to a different brokerage. Sure, if everyone does it at once then any brokerage firm will run into issues, but the underlying assets should still be safe. That is unless they're taking customer assets and moving them somewhere else.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
The federal reserve would cover the banks, that's pretty much what 2008 was, at a cost of 500 billion to the taxpayer, hence me not wanting regulation for crypto, what regulation actually means is federally back insurance
Which is why banks have reserve requirements. Regulating crypto would mean they would have to follow similar rules. That's the point.
And before you say 'well, 2008 happened anyway', I would argue that it happened (for many reasons, but) largely because the regulators allowed the lines between banks and investment firms to be blurred. Leman Brothers and the others were taking on unbacked risks with credit swaps which, if you're an investment house and you want to risk your business doing stupid things, go ahead - it's your money (banks are not allowed to take those exposures if it risks their reserves). However, in the years leading up to 2008, not only were these firms doing that, they were also becoming large players in the banking sector. The problems arose when they were doing things that a bank would not be able to do, but they were able to do as an investment firm. You cannot - or should not - be both.
The Canadian banks were always seen as too conservative, and reserve requirements were believed, by the market, to be too restrictive in Canada. Canadian banks always traded at lower than market P/Es for this very reason. Then 2008 came, and the Canadian reserves were fine, and held. Since then, Canadian banks have become global darlings.
2008 was actually a case study that demonstrated that reserves and regulations - when enacted properly - actually DO work. It's when the lines get blurred and the regulations get cast aside that the system becomes vulnerable.
1. Hex - Immutable blockchain COD. You mint your own coins, stake them and earn yield. The more you stake, and the longer you stake, the more yield you earn. This project did a 10,000x in the last bull. If it gets back to it's all time high that would be a 15x, but I think it'll do way better than that. I know a guy who got in at the start, had ~100,000,000 of these and watched it's price shoot all the way up to an all time high of 55 cents. It's down to around 3 cents now and has been holding there for most of 2022.
2. Pulsechain - A copy of ETH 2.0 built by the same guy who built Hex. Already over 130 projects are ready to be launched on it, plus it will be providing a copy of everything on ETH which should hopefully result in plenty of users and traffic. It's going to cut gas fees and transaction times down to a fraction of what you get on ETH.
3. Pulse-X - The DEX for Pulsechain (What Uniswap is to Etherium)
4. Hedron - Built on top of Hex to provide more potential benefits to Hex stakers. You can stake this coin as well and earn yield in the form of a coin called Icosa.
I've been DCA'ing into Hex and Hedron. Sacrificed for Pulse-X and will be buying more of it and Pulsechain when they launch, hopefully in the next couple months.
I think anyone DCA'ing into these projects will experience huge gains in the next bull but who knows. If I knew that for sure I'd be putting a lot more money into them than I am.
Last edited by Roof-Daddy; 11-14-2022 at 11:32 AM.
I am not. I work with a lot of groups (Polygon blockchain, Connext interop, and a large Validator Staking service specifically) but I just really like Paytrie.
It's possible at least 1 or 2 lurk here though since they're Calgary-based.
EDIT: RE Pulsechain - Any reason their socials have gone completely dark since February?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Settle down there, Temple Grandin.
Last edited by PsYcNeT; 11-14-2022 at 11:45 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to PsYcNeT For This Useful Post:
1. Hex - Immutable blockchain COD. You mint your own coins, stake them and earn yield. The more you stake, and the longer you stake, the more yield you earn. This project did a 10,000x in the last bull. If it gets back to it's all time high that would be a 15x, but I think it'll do way better than that. I know a guy who got in at the start, had ~100,000,000 of these and watched it's price shoot all the way up to an all time high of 55 cents. It's down to around 3 cents now and has been holding there for most of 2022.
2. Pulsechain - A copy of ETH 2.0 built by the same guy who built Hex. Already over 130 projects are ready to be launched on it, plus it will be providing a copy of everything on ETH which should hopefully result in plenty of users and traffic. It's going to cut gas fees and transaction times down to a fraction of what you get on ETH.
3. Pulse-X - The DEX for Pulsechain (What Uniswap is to Etherium)
4. Hedron - Built on top of Hex to provide more potential benefits to Hex stakers. You can stake this coin as well and earn yield in the form of a coin called Icosa.
I've been DCA'ing into Hex and Hedron. Sacrificed for Pulse-X and will be buying more of it and Pulsechain when they launch, hopefully in the next couple months.
I think anyone DCA'ing into these projects will experience huge gains in the next bull but who knows. If I knew that for sure I'd be putting a lot more money into them than I am.
And I guess I don't understand how you get value out of it? It creates HEX tokens you get for longer staking, but what is the fundamental value of it? Is it a tulip that is valued by whatever people will pay? So you can convert your HEX to ETH, but I guess I don't understand where the actual money comes from. They made a whole load of HEX, gave a bunch away, and now it has value becuase...?
And I guess I don't understand how you get value out of it? It creates HEX tokens you get for longer staking, but what is the fundamental value of it? Is it a tulip that is valued by whatever people will pay? So you can convert your HEX to ETH, but I guess I don't understand where the actual money comes from. They made a whole load of HEX, gave a bunch away, and now it has value becuase...?
CSPR - Layer 1 blockchain, looks to be growing and very enterprise friendly
API3 - Web 3
XRP - Real utility in cross border payments
QNT - Linking Blockchains
VeChain - Bringing supply chain to the block chain
I've always been a fan of utility in the crypto space as I think that's where the blockchain will excel and disrupt industries. I don't think crypto "currencies" will really be a thing worldwide.
Thanks for that, some of those are interesting. Appreciate the real response. CSPR seems like a good way for enterprise to get into the space, though I question whether modifiable smart contracts are a good idea. I could see many ways those could be abused. You really just have to trust whoever has control over it.
API3 doesn't sound like anything all that special. I see Web 3.0 as the realm of gatekeepers, and this just looks to be one of those.
XRP sounds legitimately useful, though I have to wonder if having a fluctuating value is of an asset at all for currency exchanges. Seems this should be pinned to some firm value.
QNT- "We deliver interoperable ecosystems and real-world solutions that lower costs, enable new business, and mitigate risk." I already hate them. Digging deeper...haha, OK wow don't look for anything but buzzwords on their website...awful stuff. https://quant.network/
Quote:
The heart of the Quant project is the Quant Network as a technology which automates the trust functions between multiple blockchains with the help of the Overledger operating system. The system is billed as the first OS to be built for blockchains, with the goal to connect blockchains and networks (such as those for the provision of financial services, healthcare and others) on a global scale, yet without hampering their interoperability.
The Overledger represents the core around which a future digital economy ecosystem is supposed to be built, allowing the developers and businesses in it to build decentralized multi-chain applications (known as MApps) for their customers. Becoming part of the Overledger, however, will be secured only with the use of QUANT (QNT) tokens which are utilized to pay for the platform use fees or annual licenses.
I guess I have to ask "but why?" I'm not sure there is a huge value to accessing the same thing on different chains and being beholden to one gatekeeper.
VeChain - Not sure corporations would want this.
Quote:
For example, the platform can be used to track quality, authenticity, storage temperature, transportation medium, and last-mile delivery of a medicine pack or an alcohol bottle right from the manufacturing facility through to the final delivery to the end customer. To accomplish this goal, VeChain uses smart chips or Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags and sensors that broadcast key information onto the blockchain network that can be accessed in real-time by authorized stakeholders.
The application of sensors means that all parameters related to the product can be constantly monitored and problems, if any, can be communicated back to the relevant stakeholders. Manufacturers and customers are informed if a drug packet is stored outside a prescribed temperature range, allowing for service improvements and better quality control.
In another example, the VeChain platform can enable automobile owners to own their data and use it to negotiate better terms and policies with their insurance companies.
I think it's interesting in a "that's neat" kind of way, but I suspect corporations would want this in an internal database that isn't visible to others, and I don't really see how this is better than using a database.Like if a customer sees a medication was transported and had a temperature spike. The customer calls foul, but the shipper knows this was from a brief temporary heat event to the external packaging. No harm to the contents. But now the company has to deal with a Tweetstorm around a non-issue. What company would want that?
The third example is silly, you don't need a blockchain for that.
I tend to look at these as "what can the blockchain do that we can't do with databases and other tools, or do it better" and I rarely see any examples of that.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Polygon - First ZK network set to launch in the next 5-6 months. Gajillion real-world partnerships with the world's best BizDev team. Near Ethereum levels of adoption. Polygon ID non-exposure identification program. Second fastest EVM in the world. Used by multiple banks as a settlement network. Upcoming Modular blockchain offshoot in Polygon Avail.
EVMOS - Only IBC-integrated EVM network. Real decent growth in a crowded and competitive space.
Scroll - Non-EVM ZK Network with a hyper competent team building slowly out of Testnet to give more options to the ZK future.
The government would be forced to stop the withdrawals.
yes but they dont have to cover all of it, they have to be seen to cover enough of it that when one or two banks gets into trouble (say the Royal Bank of Scotland) that we don't all run down to the Scotia Bank thinking we have to get there quick in order to protect our savings.
The question/argument I am making is why would we bother extending this kind of expensive government insurance to crypto, it doesn't matter to the economy and it's probably a good thing if the market is so utterly arcane/shady almost no one touches it with a ten foot pole except people who are really knowledgeable, we shouldn't be encouraging people to put their pensions into crypto any more than penny stocks
Reminder that there are no good American-run exchanges (even if they're incorporated in the Bahamas).
All the "good" ones are Taiwanese.
Curious where Canadian ones like Coinberry/Bitbuy stand in the dependability spectrum? According to them at least, they seem to be quite a bit more regulated and conservative with their holdings (ie saying that 90% of their custodied assets are held in cold storage). But everyone makes claims...
I don't have any funds with them at the moment, but it's who I used before.
Curious where Canadian ones like Coinberry/Bitbuy stand in the dependability spectrum? According to them at least, they seem to be quite a bit more regulated and conservative with their holdings (ie saying that 90% of their custodied assets are held in cold storage). But everyone makes claims...
I don't have any funds with them at the moment, but it's who I used before.
I could be wrong but it doesnt really seem to matter who or where these companies are, the real problem seems to be everyone running them is a some zoomer or millenial idiot that thinks they have the perfect scheme, I mean the theft/scams are breathtakingly stupid mostly, they are just transferring funds over to offshore private accounts, there was the Vancouver dude that 'died' in India, I mean any bank could do this it it wasnt for the thousands of layers of employees that prevent it, the Crypto companies seem to have 5 or 10 staff, that seems to be the weakness, there is pretty much just one guy able to do whatever he wants with the money.
yes but they dont have to cover all of it, they have to be seen to cover enough of it that when one or two banks gets into trouble (say the Royal Bank of Scotland) that we don't all run down to the Scotia Bank thinking we have to get there quick in order to protect our savings.
The question/argument I am making is why would we bother extending this kind of expensive government insurance to crypto, it doesn't matter to the economy and it's probably a good thing if the market is so utterly arcane/shady almost no one touches it with a ten foot pole except people who are really knowledgeable, we shouldn't be encouraging people to put their pensions into crypto any more than penny stocks
One bank CEO doesn't go and post on Twitter that another bank has liabilities that they can't cover resulting in customer panic.
That is what happened with FTX, and also Crypto.com. In both cases the Binance CEO posted on Twitter that there were 'issues' and it resulted in FUD against both companies. With FTX there were obviously problems, but at some point you can't just throw #### against the wall when it comes to your competitors and hope something sticks.
At the same time, what was going on behind the scene with FTX is insane. Second biggest Democrat Party donor, connections to the SEC, connections to numerous government officials, sex parties, tied together with big business, celebrities, cover of Forbes...etc, etc. Enron x10. And the entire time it was all a scam.
One bank CEO doesn't go and post on Twitter that another bank has liabilities that they can't cover resulting in customer panic.
That is what happened with FTX, and also Crypto.com. In both cases the Binance CEO posted on Twitter that there were 'issues' and it resulted in FUD against both companies. With FTX there were obviously problems, but at some point you can't just throw #### against the wall when it comes to your competitors and hope something sticks.
At the same time, what was going on behind the scene with FTX is insane. Second biggest Democrat Party donor, connections to the SEC, connections to numerous government officials, sex parties, tied together with big business, celebrities, cover of Forbes...etc, etc. Enron x10. And the entire time it was all a scam.
Meanwhile the dude at Binance who is claiming everything else is a scam seems reluctant to reveal where his company is actually legally based, I'm not sure you could actually regulate this level of ######baggery
I could be wrong but it doesnt really seem to matter who or where these companies are, the real problem seems to be everyone running them is a some zoomer or millenial idiot that thinks they have the perfect scheme, I mean the theft/scams are breathtakingly stupid mostly, they are just transferring funds over to offshore private accounts, there was the Vancouver dude that 'died' in India, I mean any bank could do this it it wasnt for the thousands of layers of employees that prevent it, the Crypto companies seem to have 5 or 10 staff, that seems to be the weakness, there is pretty much just one guy able to do whatever he wants with the money.
I'll tell you, as a 39 year-old working In The Space, I am very frequently the oldest guy in the room by quite a few years.
Yes, the vast majority of guys building companies are not old enough to have a lot of experience in a large company, and frequently they are either zoomer idiots and/or they are being "guided" by VC vultures that at best, you could call a Bad Influence.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Settle down there, Temple Grandin.
The Following User Says Thank You to PsYcNeT For This Useful Post:
Meanwhile the dude at Binance who is claiming everything else is a scam seems reluctant to reveal where his company is actually legally based, I'm not sure you could actually regulate this level of ######baggery
That is exactly what I mean, and Binance has also had numerous issues of their own, including an outright hack, API manipulation, and recently dropped their request for regulatory approval in Singapore.
But lets not for a second think that these practices are limited to Crypto companies. Banks and financial institutes have been caught up in shady practices for many years.
The problem here is the US refuses to play ball and help regulate these exchanges. Crypto.com has talked for basically two years that the US exchange is coming, and they simply haven't been able to get the regulatory approval in the US. In the meantime, they have it in Canada and many other countries.
But why regulate them if you can just go along with the scam and use it to help fund your political aspirations like the Democrats did with FTX.
