Commitments of Traders | CFTC

Bitcoin Options Trading Exchange

LedgerX - An Institutional Trading and Clearing Platform with full regulatory approval from the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to trade and clear options on bitcoin.
[link]

Virtual currencies are commodities, U.S. judge rules - "Virtual currencies like bitcoin can be regulated as commodities by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a federal judge ruled Tuesday."

Virtual currencies are commodities, U.S. judge rules - submitted by Lightfiend to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission launches a web page dedicated to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission launches a web page dedicated to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin submitted by enivid to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Meeting on Bitcoin Derivatives Today

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Meeting on Bitcoin Derivatives Today submitted by Atruk to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission launches a web page dedicated to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission launches a web page dedicated to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Who Wants to Be Bitcoin’s Watchdog?: The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has raised its hand. Some think it’s going too fast.

Who Wants to Be Bitcoin’s Watchdog?: The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has raised its hand. Some think it’s going too fast. submitted by f00000000 to CryptocurrencySA [link] [comments]

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission gives a go-ahead for Bitcoin futures to trade on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Chicago Board Options Exchange.

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission gives a go-ahead for Bitcoin futures to trade on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Chicago Board Options Exchange. submitted by wikinews-bot to wikinews [link] [comments]

@UPI: Trading in bitcoin futures approved by U.S. commodities commission https://t.co/0XTBXwOOCf

@UPI: Trading in bitcoin futures approved by U.S. commodities commission https://t.co/0XTBXwOOCf submitted by -en- to newsbotbot [link] [comments]

In the news • U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Approves Bitcoin Options Trading

submitted by btcforumbot to BtcForum [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations submitted by ILikeGreenit to bitcoinxt [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations submitted by ILikeGreenit to btc [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations submitted by ILikeGreenit to bitcoin_uncensored [link] [comments]

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issues order against Coinflip for conducting Bitcoin trading options without complying with the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC Regulations submitted by ILikeGreenit to Bitcoin_News [link] [comments]

XRP Isn’t A Security, Declares Former CFTC Chairman

When Chris Giancarlo was the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission he became a rock-star of sorts in certain corners of the cryptocurrency community, helping establish criteria that eventually led to bitcoin and ethereum being declared commodities, more like coffee or sugar than stock in a company. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission largely followed suit, eventually also declaring that bitcoin and ether, the cryptocurrency powering the ethereum blockchain weren’t securities.
Now chairman emeritus Giancarlo, who was deemed “Crypto Dad” following an impassioned speech he gave to Congress where he credited bitcoin for finally getting his kids interested in finance, is at it again, having co-written a detailed argument published this morning in the International Financial Law Review for why XRP, the cryptocurrency formally known as “ripples,” was also not a security. The only problem is he’s no longer a regulator. In fact, his employer is on the payroll of Ripple, the largest single owner of XRP, whose co-founders actually created the cryptocurrency.
The bombshell paper, titled, “Cryptocurrencies and U.S. Securities Laws: Beyond Bitcoin and Ether,” co-authored by commodities lawyer Conrad Bahlke of New York law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, methodically reviews the criteria of the Howey Test, established by the SEC in 1946 to determine whether something is a security, and point-by-point argues that XRP does not qualify. Rather, the paper argues, like its name would indicate, cryptocurrency is a currency of perhaps more interest to the Federal Reserve and central banks than securities regulators.
submitted by ami_nil1987 to DigitalCryptoWorld [link] [comments]

XRP Isn’t A Security, Declares Former CFTC Chairman

When Chris Giancarlo was the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission he became a rock-star of sorts in certain corners of the cryptocurrency community, helping establish criteria that eventually led to bitcoin and ethereum being declared commodities, more like coffee or sugar than stock in a company. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission largely followed suit, eventually also declaring that bitcoin and ether, the cryptocurrency powering the ethereum blockchain weren’t securities.
Now chairman emeritus Giancarlo, who was deemed “Crypto Dad” following an impassioned speech he gave to Congress where he credited bitcoin for finally getting his kids interested in finance, is at it again, having co-written a detailed argument published this morning in the International Financial Law Review for why XRP, the cryptocurrency formally known as “ripples,” was also not a security. The only problem is he’s no longer a regulator. In fact, his employer is on the payroll of Ripple, the largest single owner of XRP, whose co-founders actually created the cryptocurrency.
The bombshell paper, titled, “Cryptocurrencies and U.S. Securities Laws: Beyond Bitcoin and Ether,” co-authored by commodities lawyer Conrad Bahlke of New York law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, methodically reviews the criteria of the Howey Test, established by the SEC in 1946 to determine whether something is a security, and point-by-point argues that XRP does not qualify. Rather, the paper argues, like its name would indicate, cryptocurrency is a currency of perhaps more interest to the Federal Reserve and central banks than securities regulators.
submitted by ami_nil1987 to airdropfactory [link] [comments]

XRP Isn’t A Security, Declares Former CFTC Chairman

XRP Isn’t A Security, Declares Former CFTC Chairman
https://preview.redd.it/8yehv8lzsce51.jpg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69f0a6eb4973a5a9974e42d15709434719a26a81
When Chris Giancarlo was the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission he became a rock-star of sorts in certain corners of the cryptocurrency community, helping establish criteria that eventually led to bitcoin and ethereum being declared commodities, more like coffee or sugar than stock in a company. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission largely followed suit, eventually also declaring that bitcoin and ether, the cryptocurrency powering the ethereum blockchain weren’t securities.
Now chairman emeritus Giancarlo, who was deemed “Crypto Dad” following an impassioned speech he gave to Congress where he credited bitcoin for finally getting his kids interested in finance, is at it again, having co-written a detailed argument published this morning in the International Financial Law Review for why XRP, the cryptocurrency formally known as “ripples,” was also not a security. The only problem is he’s no longer a regulator. In fact, his employer is on the payroll of Ripple, the largest single owner of XRP, whose co-founders actually created the cryptocurrency.
The bombshell paper, titled, “Cryptocurrencies and U.S. Securities Laws: Beyond Bitcoin and Ether,” co-authored by commodities lawyer Conrad Bahlke of New York law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, methodically reviews the criteria of the Howey Test, established by the SEC in 1946 to determine whether something is a security, and point-by-point argues that XRP does not qualify. Rather, the paper argues, like its name would indicate, cryptocurrency is a currency of perhaps more interest to the Federal Reserve and central banks than securities regulators.
What’s at stake here to the cryptocurrency world cannot be overestimated. XRP is now the fourth largest cryptocurrency by market cap, with $5.9 billion worth of the asset in circulation according to cryptocurrency data site Messari. While Ripple was valued at $10 billion according to its most recent round of funding, the company continues to fund itself in part by selling its deep war chest of 55.6 billion XRP, coincidentally valued at the same amount as the company itself.
Not only could an eventual decision by the SEC to classify—or not classify—XRP as a security impact the untold individual owners of the cryptocurrency, but other clients using Ripple services that don’t rely on the cryptocurrency, including American Express, Santander, and SBI Holdings could stand to be impacted positively or negatively depending on the decision. After all if XRP were to be rescinded it would be a huge cost to their software provider. If Giancarlo is right though, Ripple could end up being one of the most valuable startups in fintech.
“Ultimately, under a fair application of the Howey test and the SEC’s presently expanding analysis, XRP should not be regulated as a security, but instead considered a currency or a medium of exchange,” Giancarlo and Bahlke argue in the paper. “The increased adoption of XRP as a medium of exchange and a form of payment in recent years, both by consumers and in the business-to-business setting, further underscores the utility of XRP as a bona fide fiat substitute.”
Giancarlo was nominated to be a commissioner of the CFTC by then-President Barack Obama in 2013. In 2015, he helped lead the thinking behind the CFTC’s decision that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies were commodities, paving the way for the SEC’s related comments that neither bitcoin nor ethereum are securities. Then, at the height of the 2017 cryptocurrency bubble President Trump nominated him to be Chairman of the CFTC, where he oversaw the creation of a number of bitcoin futures projects, including at CME Group and the short-lived effort at Cboe.
While many blame the creation of bitcoin futures for popping the 2017 price bubble, which almost hit $20,000 before halving today, others have seen the works as a fundamental process of maturity, helping pave the way for more sophisticated crypto-enabled financial offerings. Giancarlo’s last day in office at the CFTC was in 2019, after which he promptly got involved helping envision the future of assets issued on a blockchain. In November he joined as an advisor to American Financial Exchange, using ethereum to create a Libor alternative. The following January he co-founded the Digital Dollar Project leading the push to use blockchain at the Federal Reserve and now it would seem he’s hoping to influence the classification of XRP as he did for bitcoin and ethereum, but from the other side of regulation.
Importantly however, a footnote in the report discloses that not only is Giancarlo and Bahlke’s firm, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP counsel to Ripple Labs, but they “relied on certain factual information provided by Ripple in the preparation of this article.” While it’s impossible to parse what information came from the co-authors and what came from Ripple, the resulting legal argument is fascinating, even if it does leave room for doubt.
The Howey test Giancarlo uses to bolster his arguments is a three-pronged definition used by the SEC, none of which he says apply to XRP. The first prong, is that an investment contract should be implied or explicitly stated between the issuer of the asset, in this case XRP and the owner, in which money exchanges hands. “The mere fact that an individual holds XRP does not create any relationship, rights or privileges with respect to Ripple any more than owning Ether would create a contract with the Ethereum Foundation, the organization that oversees the Ethereum architecture,” he writes.
This does however overlook the fact that OpenCoin, credited on Ripple’s own site in 2013 for creating XRP (then tellingly described as “ripples”), was run by many of the same people that founded Ripple. The original creators of XRP then donated the vast majority of the assets to Ripple, which they also ran, creating a sense of distance, tacit though it may be. The actual data around the creation of XRP was also muddled by a glitch in the code that means unlike bitcoin and ethereum the crucial genesis data is no longer attached to the rest of the ledger. The rebranding of “ripples” as XRP further extended the sense of distance between XRP and Ripple, followed by an aggressive campaign to get media to stop describing the cryptocurrency as “Ripple’s XRP.”
With so much distance between the company that actually created XRP and the company that now owns more than half of it, one would be forgiven for wondering, if there was an implied contract between OpenCoin and XRP owners, does the donation from one group of people at one company to a very similar group of people at another company sever that responsibility? In spite of the sense of distance created by Ripple between itself and the cryptocurrency its co-founders created, a number of active lawsuits alleging securities violations have been filed. In all fairness though, Giancarlo appears to recognize this prong may not be Ripple’s strongest defense and concludes the section, hedging: “Even if XRP were to satisfy one or two of the “prongs” of the Howey test, it does not satisfy all three factors such that XRP is an investment contract subject to regulation as a security.”
The second prong of the Howey test stipulates that there can be no “common enterprise” between shareholders or a shareholder and the company. While refuting both relationships, Giancarlo curiously goes onto to write that “given the juxtaposition between XRP’s intended use as a liquidity tool, its more general use to transfer value and its potential as a speculative asset, XRP holders who utilize the coins for different purposes have divergent interests with respect to XRP.”
Ironically, there has always been a widely held belief that owning a cryptocurrency would unify interests around a single goal: to co-create the infrastructure that lets the cryptocurrency exist and ensure it was vibrant and diverse. Meanwhile, XRP, in spite of its aggressive supporters on social media, is one of the least diverse ecosystems, with the vast majority of serious development being done within Ripple. If XRP owners aren’t expecting an increase in value from the work being done by Ripple, they certainly aren’t nearly as involved in helping build that future as are owners of bitcoin and ethereum.
In a related issue, the third prong of the Howey test stipulates that “no reasonable expectation of profit should be derived from the efforts of Ripple,” according to the paper. Supporting this position, Giancarlo writes: “Though Ripple maintains a sizable stake of the XRP supply and certainly has a pecuniary interest in the value of its holdings, it is not enough to suggest that a mutual interest in the value of an asset gives rise to an expectation of profits as contemplated by Howey.” Again, this strains credulity.
According to its own site, Ripple currently has access to 6.4% of all the XRP ever created. But that doesn’t count the 49.2% of the total XRP Ripple owns, but is locked in a series of escrow accounts that become periodically available to Ripple and Ripple alone. Adding those two percentages together leaves a float of only about 44% of XRP that has been distributed for public ownership. For some comparison, Facebook went public the same year XRP was created and has a 99% float, according to FactSet data, meaning almost all of its stock is in the hands of traders.While Ripple does also have more traditional stock, this distribution shows that Ripple might not be as distributed as it claims.
While it’s perhaps no surprise that Giancarlo would come out on the side of his own client, there’s also plenty of other reasons to believe his argument may in fact hold water. In February 2018, the notoriously compliant exchange Coinbase added support for XRP, something it would unlikely do if it were concerned it might accidentally be selling an unlicensed security. Perhaps most tellingly though, Ripple has also been granted a difficult-to-obtain BitLicense from the New York Department of Financial Services, giving it the blessing of a respected regulator. However, while the license was granted after then-superintendent Benjamin Lawsky stepped down from the regulator, it's perhaps no coincidence that a year later he joined Ripple on its board of directors and is now active in the cryptocurrency space. Perhaps a similar fate is in store for Giancarlo.
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to clarify that Ripple Labs is a client of Giancarlo’s law firm.
submitted by wazzocklegless to u/wazzocklegless [link] [comments]

Binance Support Number 🎧 【+𝐼 】 𝟪𝟦𝟦-𝟫𝟢𝟩-𝒪𝟧𝟪𝟥☎️ Customer Service Number

Binance Support Number 🎧 【+𝐼 】 𝟪𝟦𝟦-𝟫𝟢𝟩-𝒪𝟧𝟪𝟥☎️ Customer Service Number

Binance support number 1844-907-0583 CEO Changpeng "CZ" Zhao really doesn't want to tell you where his firm's headquarters is located.
Binance support number 1844-907-0583 has loads of offices, he continued, with staff in 50 countries. It was a new type of organization that doesn't need registered bank accounts and postal addresses.
To kick off ConsenSys' Ethereal Summit on Thursday, Unchained Podcast host Laura Shin held a cozy fireside chat with Zhao who, to mark the occasion, was wearing a personalized football shirt emblazoned with the Binance support number 1844-907-0583 brand.
Scheduled for 45 minutes, Zhao spent most of it explaining how libra and China's digital yuan were unlikely to be competitors to existing stablecoin providers; how Binance support number 1844-907-0583's smart chain wouldn't tread on Ethereum's toes – "that depends on the definition of competing," he said – and how Binance support number 1844-907-0583 had an incentive to keep its newly acquired CoinMarketCap independent from the exchange.
There were only five minutes left on the clock. Zhao was looking confident; he had just batted away a thorny question about an ongoing lawsuit. It was looking like the home stretch.
Then it hit. Shin asked the one question Zhao really didn't want to have to answer, but many want to know: Where is Binance support number 1844-907-0583's headquarters?
This seemingly simple question is actually more complex. Until February, Binance support number 1844-907-0583 was considered to be based in Malta. That changed when the island European nation announced that, no, Binance support number 1844-907-0583 is not under its jurisdiction. Since then Binance support number 1844-907-0583 has not said just where, exactly, it is now headquartered.
Little wonder that when asked Zhao reddened; he stammered. He looked off-camera, possibly to an aide. "Well, I think what this is is the beauty of the blockchain, right, so you don't have to ... like where's the Bitcoin office, because Bitcoin doesn't have an office," he said.
The line trailed off, then inspiration hit. "What kind of horse is a car?" Zhao asked. "Wherever I sit, is going to be the Binance support number 1844-907-0583 office. Wherever I need somebody, is going to be the Binance support number 1844-907-0583 office," he said.
Zhao may have been hoping the host would move onto something easier. But Shin wasn't finished: "But even to do things like to handle, you know, taxes for your employees, like, I think you need a registered business entity, so like why are you obfuscating it, why not just be open about it like, you know, the headquarters is registered in this place, why not just say that?"
Zhao glanced away again, possibly at the person behind the camera. Their program had less than two minutes remaining. "It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's not that we want to obfuscate it or we want to kind of hide it. We're not hiding, we're in the open," he said.
Shin interjected: "What are you saying that you're already some kind of DAO [decentralized autonomous organization]? I mean what are you saying? Because it's not the old way [having a headquarters], it's actually the current way ... I actually don't know what you are or what you're claiming to be."
Zhao said Binance support number 1844-907-0583 isn't a traditional company, more a large team of people "that works together for a common goal." He added: "To be honest, if we classified as a DAO, then there's going to be a lot of debate about why we're not a DAO. So I don't want to go there, either."
"I mean nobody would call you guys a DAO," Shin said, likely disappointed that this wasn't the interview where Zhao made his big reveal.
Time was up. For an easy question to close, Shin asked where Zhao was working from during the coronavirus pandemic.
"I'm in Asia," Zhao said. The blank white wall behind him didn't provide any clues about where in Asia he might be. Shin asked if he could say which country – after all, it's the Earth's largest continent.
"I prefer not to disclose that. I think that's my own privacy," he cut in, ending the interview.
It was a provocative way to start the biggest cryptocurrency and blockchain event of the year.
In the opening session of Consensus: Distributed this week, Lawrence Summers was asked by my co-host Naomi Brockwell about protecting people’s privacy once currencies go digital. His answer: “I think the problems we have now with money involve too much privacy.”
President Clinton’s former Treasury secretary, now President Emeritus at Harvard, referenced the 500-euro note, which bore the nickname “The Bin Laden,” to argue the un-traceability of cash empowers wealthy criminals to finance themselves. “Of all the important freedoms,” he continued, “the ability to possess, transfer and do business with multi-million dollar sums of money anonymously seems to me to be one of the least important.” Summers ended the segment by saying that “if I have provoked others, I will have served my purpose.”
You’re reading Money Reimagined, a weekly look at the technological, economic and social events and trends that are redefining our relationship with money and transforming the global financial system. You can subscribe to this and all of CoinDesk’s newsletters here.
That he did. Among the more than 20,000 registered for the weeklong virtual experience was a large contingent of libertarian-minded folks who see state-backed monitoring of their money as an affront to their property rights.
But with due respect to a man who has had prodigious influence on international economic policymaking, it’s not wealthy bitcoiners for whom privacy matters. It matters for all humanity and, most importantly, for the poor.
Now, as the world grapples with how to collect and disseminate public health information in a way that both saves lives and preserves civil liberties, the principle of privacy deserves to be elevated in importance.
Just this week, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the 9/11-era Patriot Act and failed to pass a proposed amendment to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from monitoring our online browsing without a warrant. Meanwhile, our heightened dependence on online social connections during COVID-19 isolation has further empowered a handful of internet platforms that are incorporating troves of our personal data into sophisticated predictive behavior models. This process of hidden control is happening right now, not in some future "Westworld"-like existence.
Digital currencies will only worsen this situation. If they are added to this comprehensive surveillance infrastructure, it could well spell the end of the civil liberties that underpin Western civilization.
Yes, freedom matters
Please don’t read this, Secretary Summers, as some privileged anti-taxation take or a self-interested what’s-mine-is-mine demand that “the government stay away from my money.”
Money is just the instrument here. What matters is whether our transactions, our exchanges of goods and services and the source of our economic and social value, should be monitored and manipulated by government and corporate owners of centralized databases. It’s why critics of China’s digital currency plans rightly worry about a “panopticon” and why, in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, there was an initial backlash against Facebook launching its libra currency.
Writers such as Shoshana Zuboff and Jared Lanier have passionately argued that our subservience to the hidden algorithms of what I like to call “GoogAzonBook” is diminishing our free will. Resisting that is important, not just to preserve the ideal of “the self” but also to protect the very functioning of society.
Markets, for one, are pointless without free will. In optimizing resource allocation, they presume autonomy among those who make up the market. Free will, which I’ll define as the ability to lawfully transact on my own terms without knowingly or unknowingly acting in someone else’s interests to my detriment, is a bedrock of market democracies. Without a sufficient right to privacy, it disintegrates – and in the digital age, that can happen very rapidly.
Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, losing privacy undermines the fungibility of money. Each digital dollar should be substitutable for another. If our transactions carry a history and authorities can target specific notes or tokens for seizure because of their past involvement in illicit activity, then some dollars become less valuable than other dollars.
The excluded
But to fully comprehend the harm done by encroachments into financial privacy, look to the world’s poor.
An estimated 1.7 billion adults are denied a bank account because they can’t furnish the information that banks’ anti-money laundering (AML) officers need, either because their government’s identity infrastructure is untrusted or because of the danger to them of furnishing such information to kleptocratic regimes. Unable to let banks monitor them, they’re excluded from the global economy’s dominant payment and savings system – victims of a system that prioritizes surveillance over privacy.
Misplaced priorities also contribute to the “derisking” problem faced by Caribbean and Latin American countries, where investment inflows have slowed and financial costs have risen in the past decade. America’s gatekeeping correspondent banks, fearful of heavy fines like the one imposed on HSBC for its involvement in a money laundering scandal, have raised the bar on the kind of personal information that regional banks must obtain from their local clients.
And where’s the payoff? Despite this surveillance system, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion and $2 trillion, or 2%-5% of global gross domestic product, is laundered annually worldwide. The Panama Papers case shows how the rich and powerful easily use lawyers, shell companies, tax havens and transaction obfuscation to get around surveillance. The poor are just excluded from the system.
Caring about privacy
Solutions are coming that wouldn’t require abandoning law enforcement efforts. Self-sovereign identity models and zero-knowledge proofs, for example, grant control over data to the individuals who generate it, allowing them to provide sufficient proof of a clean record without revealing sensitive personal information. But such innovations aren’t getting nearly enough attention.
Few officials inside developed country regulatory agencies seem to acknowledge the cost of cutting off 1.7 billion poor from the financial system. Yet, their actions foster poverty and create fertile conditions for terrorism and drug-running, the very crimes they seek to contain. The reaction to evidence of persistent money laundering is nearly always to make bank secrecy laws even more demanding. Exhibit A: Europe’s new AML 5 directive.
To be sure, in the Consensus discussion that followed the Summers interview, it was pleasing to hear another former U.S. official take a more accommodative view of privacy. Former Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chairman Christopher Giancarlo said that “getting the privacy balance right” is a “design imperative” for the digital dollar concept he is actively promoting.
But to hold both governments and corporations to account on that design, we need an aware, informed public that recognizes the risks of ceding their civil liberties to governments or to GoogAzonBook.
Let’s talk about this, people.
A missing asterisk
Control for all variables. At the end of the day, the dollar’s standing as the world’s reserve currency ultimately comes down to how much the rest of the world trusts the United States to continue its de facto leadership of the world economy. In the past, that assessment was based on how well the U.S. militarily or otherwise dealt with human- and state-led threats to international commerce such as Soviet expansionism or terrorism. But in the COVID-19 era only one thing matters: how well it is leading the fight against the pandemic.
So if you’ve already seen the charts below and you’re wondering what they’re doing in a newsletter about the battle for the future of money, that’s why. They were inspired by a staged White House lawn photo-op Tuesday, where President Trump was flanked by a huge banner that dealt quite literally with a question of American leadership. It read, “America Leads the World in Testing.” That’s a claim that’s technically correct, but one that surely demands a big red asterisk. When you’re the third-largest country by population – not to mention the richest – having the highest number of tests is not itself much of an achievement. The claim demands a per capita adjustment. Here’s how things look, first in absolute terms, then adjusted for tests per million inhabitants.
Binance support number 1844-907-0583 has frozen funds linked to Upbit’s prior $50 million data breach after the hackers tried to liquidate a part of the gains. In a recent tweet, Whale Alert warned Binance support number 1844-907-0583 that a transaction of 137 ETH (about $28,000) had moved from an address linked to the Upbit hacker group to its wallets.
Less than an hour after the transaction was flagged, Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance support number 1844-907-0583, announced that the exchange had frozen the funds. He also added that Binance support number 1844-907-0583 is getting in touch with Upbit to investigate the transaction. In November 2019, Upbit suffered an attack in which hackers stole 342,000 ETH, accounting for approximately $50 million. The hackers managed to take the funds by transferring the ETH from Upbit’s hot wallet to an anonymous crypto address.
submitted by SnooPeripherals4556 to u/SnooPeripherals4556 [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Market Weekly Report - Week of 15/06/2020

Bitcoin Market Weekly Report - Week of 15/06/2020

Coinviva BTC/USD Hourly Chart
The Bitcoin price moved within an upward channel last week but struggled to break above the barrier at $9,900. It formed a lower high at $9,835 on June 9th, which indicated a reversal of the existing upward trend.
The BTC market opened with a 3% drop at $9,447, which confirmed that the trend is reversed. It is consistent with the reversal of the US stock market last week. The BTC price will likely test the support at $9,000 and then make a bounce before testing the next support at $8,800.
Disclaimer: The above market commentary is based on technical analysis using historical pricing data, and is for reference only. It does not serve as investment or trading advice.

Review of the week:
JPMorgan Chase, one of America’s biggest banks, praises Bitcoin's resilience in a Bloomberg report in terms of liquidity when compared to traditional assets such as U.S. stocks during the all-out collapse, while its strategists highlights the ‘longevity’ of the novel asset class after Bitcoin managed to recover from the cataclysmic crash that sent shockwaves around the cryptocurrency back in March. Back in May, JPMorgan welcomed Coinbase and Gemini as their first cryptocurrency clients. Yet JPMorgan insists that Bitcoin is still used as a speculative investment vehicle, not as a store of value.
Former Chairman of the US Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chris Giancarlo, who attended a Congress hearing about Financial Services on June 12th, emphasizing the importance of moving with purpose to develop a Fed-backed central bank digital currency (CBDC) to compete with similar assets being rolled out in China. Giancarlo also said any “digital dollar” should function exactly the same as physical cash, with all the privacy and portability that entails. He stressed that these features are an essential part of what makes the US dollar the world’s standard reserve currency, and that if legislators fail to act the country could lose much of its international clout, including the ability to effectively sanction targeted countries like North Korea or Iran.
About Coinviva:
Coinviva aims to create the best crypto financial services ecosystem for both institutional and individual investors. We provide reliable fiat funding options, excellent trading liquidity, bank security level custody and one-stop high liquidity provision on-site & off-site. Our founding management team all come from top tiered investment banking (e.g. JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America Merrill Lynch), with fully comprehensive financial institution operation experience.
Homepage: https://coinviva.com/
Telegram: https://t.me/coinviva
submitted by Coinviva to u/Coinviva [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Market Weekly Report - Week of 01/06/2020

Bitcoin Market Weekly Report - Week of 01/06/2020

Coinviva BTC/USD Hourly Chart
The Bitcoin price continued to go sideway and form a range between $8,600 and $9,700, indicating a lack of directional movement similar to the stock market. The current resistance is at $9,800, while the support is at $8,600.
The market is likely to trade in a range bound next week until both volume and volatility start picking up again. If the BTC price drops below $9,000 while forming a low at $8,800, it could be an opportunity to accumulate and aim for a profit near $9,600.
Review of the week:
On May 28, the Digital Dollar Project, which was founded by former leaders of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and professional services company Accenture, released its white paper with a 30-page document detailing the potential applications of a CBDC. The project aims to be a pioneer as a way to explore the utilization of the digital dollar and how it can be used, including how it can be used in a crisis. But to make the project work within regulatory bounds, it explicitly does not seek to upend the current monetary system of the U.S. Several while it mentions maintaining the format of currency flowing from the Federal Reserve to financial institutions and then to the public to meet Know Your Customer or Anti-Money Laundering requirements. As for privacy, a central concern, CFTC’s former chairman Daniel Gorfine said: “This is a very meaty and important area. Ultimately, these are policy choices that need to be made by the government.”
Disclaimer: The above market commentary is based on technical analysis using historical pricing data, and is for reference only. It does not serve as investment or trading advice.
About Coinviva:
Coinviva aims to create the best crypto financial services ecosystem for both institutional and individual investors. We provide reliable fiat funding options, excellent trading liquidity, bank security level custody and one-stop high liquidity provision on-site & off-site. Our founding management team all come from top tiered investment banking (e.g. JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America Merrill Lynch), with fully comprehensive financial institution operation experience.
Homepage: https://coinviva.com/
Telegram: https://t.me/coinviva
submitted by Coinviva to u/Coinviva [link] [comments]

Binance Customer Care Number +(𝟣) 𝟪𝟦𝟦-𝟫𝟣𝟪-𝟢𝟧𝟪𝟣 Call Now and Talk To Rep

Binance Customer Care Number +(𝟣) 𝟪𝟦𝟦-𝟫𝟣𝟪-𝟢𝟧𝟪𝟣

Binance support number 1844-918-0581 CEO Changpeng "CZ" Zhao really doesn't want to tell you where his firm's headquarters is located.
To kick off ConsenSys' Ethereal Summit on Thursday, Unchained Podcast host Laura Shin held a cozy fireside chat with Zhao who, to mark the occasion, was wearing a personalized football shirt emblazoned with the Binance support number 1844-918-0581 brand.
Scheduled for 45 minutes, Zhao spent most of it explaining how libra and China's digital yuan were unlikely to be competitors to existing stablecoin providers; how Binance support number 1844-918-0581's smart chain wouldn't tread on Ethereum's toes – "that depends on the definition of competing," he said – and how Binance support number 1844-918-0581 had an incentive to keep its newly acquired CoinMarketCap independent from the exchange.
There were only five minutes left on the clock. Zhao was looking confident; he had just batted away a thorny question about an ongoing lawsuit. It was looking like the home stretch.
Then it hit. Shin asked the one question Zhao really didn't want to have to answer, but many want to know: Where is Binance support number 1844-918-0581's headquarters?
This seemingly simple question is actually more complex. Until February, Binance support number 1844-918-0581 was considered to be based in Malta. That changed when the island European nation announced that, no, Binance support number 1844-918-0581 is not under its jurisdiction. Since then Binance support number 1844-918-0581 has not said just where, exactly, it is now headquartered.
Little wonder that when asked Zhao reddened; he stammered. He looked off-camera, possibly to an aide. "Well, I think what this is is the beauty of the blockchain, right, so you don't have to ... like where's the Bitcoin office, because Bitcoin doesn't have an office," he said.
The line trailed off, then inspiration hit. "What kind of horse is a car?" Zhao asked. Binance support number 1844-918-0581 has loads of offices, he continued, with staff in 50 countries. It was a new type of organization that doesn't need registered bank accounts and postal addresses.
"Wherever I sit, is going to be the Binance support number 1844-918-0581 office. Wherever I need somebody, is going to be the Binance support number 1844-918-0581 office," he said.
Zhao may have been hoping the host would move onto something easier. But Shin wasn't finished: "But even to do things like to handle, you know, taxes for your employees, like, I think you need a registered business entity, so like why are you obfuscating it, why not just be open about it like, you know, the headquarters is registered in this place, why not just say that?"
Zhao glanced away again, possibly at the person behind the camera. Their program had less than two minutes remaining. "It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's not that we want to obfuscate it or we want to kind of hide it. We're not hiding, we're in the open," he said.
Shin interjected: "What are you saying that you're already some kind of DAO [decentralized autonomous organization]? I mean what are you saying? Because it's not the old way [having a headquarters], it's actually the current way ... I actually don't know what you are or what you're claiming to be."
Zhao said Binance support number 1844-918-0581 isn't a traditional company, more a large team of people "that works together for a common goal." He added: "To be honest, if we classified as a DAO, then there's going to be a lot of debate about why we're not a DAO. So I don't want to go there, either."
"I mean nobody would call you guys a DAO," Shin said, likely disappointed that this wasn't the interview where Zhao made his big reveal.
Time was up. For an easy question to close, Shin asked where Zhao was working from during the coronavirus pandemic.
"I'm in Asia," Zhao said. The blank white wall behind him didn't provide any clues about where in Asia he might be. Shin asked if he could say which country – after all, it's the Earth's largest continent.
"I prefer not to disclose that. I think that's my own privacy," he cut in, ending the interview.
It was a provocative way to start the biggest cryptocurrency and blockchain event of the year.
In the opening session of Consensus: Distributed this week, Lawrence Summers was asked by my co-host Naomi Brockwell about protecting people’s privacy once currencies go digital. His answer: “I think the problems we have now with money involve too much privacy.”
President Clinton’s former Treasury secretary, now President Emeritus at Harvard, referenced the 500-euro note, which bore the nickname “The Bin Laden,” to argue the un-traceability of cash empowers wealthy criminals to finance themselves. “Of all the important freedoms,” he continued, “the ability to possess, transfer and do business with multi-million dollar sums of money anonymously seems to me to be one of the least important.” Summers ended the segment by saying that “if I have provoked others, I will have served my purpose.”
You’re reading Money Reimagined, a weekly look at the technological, economic and social events and trends that are redefining our relationship with money and transforming the global financial system. You can subscribe to this and all of CoinDesk’s newsletters here.
That he did. Among the more than 20,000 registered for the weeklong virtual experience was a large contingent of libertarian-minded folks who see state-backed monitoring of their money as an affront to their property rights.
But with due respect to a man who has had prodigious influence on international economic policymaking, it’s not wealthy bitcoiners for whom privacy matters. It matters for all humanity and, most importantly, for the poor.
Now, as the world grapples with how to collect and disseminate public health information in a way that both saves lives and preserves civil liberties, the principle of privacy deserves to be elevated in importance.
Just this week, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the 9/11-era Patriot Act and failed to pass a proposed amendment to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from monitoring our online browsing without a warrant. Meanwhile, our heightened dependence on online social connections during COVID-19 isolation has further empowered a handful of internet platforms that are incorporating troves of our personal data into sophisticated predictive behavior models. This process of hidden control is happening right now, not in some future "Westworld"-like existence.
Digital currencies will only worsen this situation. If they are added to this comprehensive surveillance infrastructure, it could well spell the end of the civil liberties that underpin Western civilization.
Yes, freedom matters
Please don’t read this, Secretary Summers, as some privileged anti-taxation take or a self-interested what’s-mine-is-mine demand that “the government stay away from my money.”
Money is just the instrument here. What matters is whether our transactions, our exchanges of goods and services and the source of our economic and social value, should be monitored and manipulated by government and corporate owners of centralized databases. It’s why critics of China’s digital currency plans rightly worry about a “panopticon” and why, in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, there was an initial backlash against Facebook launching its libra currency.
Writers such as Shoshana Zuboff and Jared Lanier have passionately argued that our subservience to the hidden algorithms of what I like to call “GoogAzonBook” is diminishing our free will. Resisting that is important, not just to preserve the ideal of “the self” but also to protect the very functioning of society.
Markets, for one, are pointless without free will. In optimizing resource allocation, they presume autonomy among those who make up the market. Free will, which I’ll define as the ability to lawfully transact on my own terms without knowingly or unknowingly acting in someone else’s interests to my detriment, is a bedrock of market democracies. Without a sufficient right to privacy, it disintegrates – and in the digital age, that can happen very rapidly.
Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, losing privacy undermines the fungibility of money. Each digital dollar should be substitutable for another. If our transactions carry a history and authorities can target specific notes or tokens for seizure because of their past involvement in illicit activity, then some dollars become less valuable than other dollars.
The excluded
But to fully comprehend the harm done by encroachments into financial privacy, look to the world’s poor.
An estimated 1.7 billion adults are denied a bank account because they can’t furnish the information that banks’ anti-money laundering (AML) officers need, either because their government’s identity infrastructure is untrusted or because of the danger to them of furnishing such information to kleptocratic regimes. Unable to let banks monitor them, they’re excluded from the global economy’s dominant payment and savings system – victims of a system that prioritizes surveillance over privacy.
Misplaced priorities also contribute to the “derisking” problem faced by Caribbean and Latin American countries, where investment inflows have slowed and financial costs have risen in the past decade. America’s gatekeeping correspondent banks, fearful of heavy fines like the one imposed on HSBC for its involvement in a money laundering scandal, have raised the bar on the kind of personal information that regional banks must obtain from their local clients.
And where’s the payoff? Despite this surveillance system, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion and $2 trillion, or 2%-5% of global gross domestic product, is laundered annually worldwide. The Panama Papers case shows how the rich and powerful easily use lawyers, shell companies, tax havens and transaction obfuscation to get around surveillance. The poor are just excluded from the system.
Caring about privacy
Solutions are coming that wouldn’t require abandoning law enforcement efforts. Self-sovereign identity models and zero-knowledge proofs, for example, grant control over data to the individuals who generate it, allowing them to provide sufficient proof of a clean record without revealing sensitive personal information. But such innovations aren’t getting nearly enough attention.
Few officials inside developed country regulatory agencies seem to acknowledge the cost of cutting off 1.7 billion poor from the financial system. Yet, their actions foster poverty and create fertile conditions for terrorism and drug-running, the very crimes they seek to contain. The reaction to evidence of persistent money laundering is nearly always to make bank secrecy laws even more demanding. Exhibit A: Europe’s new AML 5 directive.
To be sure, in the Consensus discussion that followed the Summers interview, it was pleasing to hear another former U.S. official take a more accommodative view of privacy. Former Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chairman Christopher Giancarlo said that “getting the privacy balance right” is a “design imperative” for the digital dollar concept he is actively promoting.
But to hold both governments and corporations to account on that design, we need an aware, informed public that recognizes the risks of ceding their civil liberties to governments or to GoogAzonBook.
Let’s talk about this, people.
A missing asterisk
Control for all variables. At the end of the day, the dollar’s standing as the world’s reserve currency ultimately comes down to how much the rest of the world trusts the United States to continue its de facto leadership of the world economy. In the past, that assessment was based on how well the U.S. militarily or otherwise dealt with human- and state-led threats to international commerce such as Soviet expansionism or terrorism. But in the COVID-19 era only one thing matters: how well it is leading the fight against the pandemic.
So if you’ve already seen the charts below and you’re wondering what they’re doing in a newsletter about the battle for the future of money, that’s why. They were inspired by a staged White House lawn photo-op Tuesday, where President Trump was flanked by a huge banner that dealt quite literally with a question of American leadership. It read, “America Leads the World in Testing.” That’s a claim that’s technically correct, but one that surely demands a big red asterisk. When you’re the third-largest country by population – not to mention the richest – having the highest number of tests is not itself much of an achievement. The claim demands a per capita adjustment. Here’s how things look, first in absolute terms, then adjusted for tests per million inhabitants.
Binance support number 1844-918-0581 has frozen funds linked to Upbit’s prior $50 million data breach after the hackers tried to liquidate a part of the gains. In a recent tweet, Whale Alert warned Binance support number 1844-918-0581 that a transaction of 137 ETH (about $28,000) had moved from an address linked to the Upbit hacker group to its wallets.
Less than an hour after the transaction was flagged, Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance support number 1844-918-0581, announced that the exchange had frozen the funds. He also added that Binance support number 1844-918-0581 is getting in touch with Upbit to investigate the transaction. In November 2019, Upbit suffered an attack in which hackers stole 342,000 ETH, accounting for approximately $50 million. The hackers managed to take the funds by transferring the ETH from Upbit’s hot wallet to an anonymous crypto address.
submitted by Witty-Sound to u/Witty-Sound [link] [comments]

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Buys Over 1.5 Times Total BTC Mined Since Halving

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) has been racking up the number of BTC it has purchased since the third Bitcoin halving. Between May 12 and May 18, the week following the halving, Grayscale Bitcoin Trust acquired 12,021.15320371 bitcoins representing $112,336,936, according to Grayscale Investments’ filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
The following week, from May 19 to May 26, the trust aggregated 6,889.32628892 bitcoins representing $65,231,657. During the two-week period, Grayscale Investments bought a total of 18,910.47949263 bitcoins. Analyst Kevin Rooke tweeted on Wednesday:
Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust bought 18,910 bitcoins since the halving. Only 12,337 bitcoins have been mined since the halving.
This means Grayscale Bitcoin Trust added more than 1.5 times the number of bitcoins mined during the two-week period after the third Bitcoin halving. This represents a major increase in its buying. For the 100-day period ending May 17, news.Bitcoin.com previously reported that Grayscale Investments purchased 33% of all bitcoin mined.
“Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust is on a whole new level in 2020 … Institutional money has arrived,” Rooke asserted last week. In response to his analysis showing GBTC’s average weekly investment of $29.9 million in Q1 2020, a substantial increase from the $3.2 million in the first quarter of last year, Grayscale CEO Barry Silbert hinted on Twitter: “just wait until you see Q2.”
As of May 28, Grayscale Investments’ total assets under management (AUM) is $3.7 billion, spread over 10 cryptocurrency investment products. Among them, Grayscale Bitcoin Trust has the largest AUM of $3,302.2 million, followed by Grayscale Ethereum Trust with an AUM of $292.6 million. Grayscale previously revealed that 88% of all capital inflows in the first quarter were from institutional investors, dominated by hedge funds. Both the Bitcoin Trust and the Ethereum Trust saw record capital inflows.
Analysts have predicted rising institutional demand for cryptocurrency after the global economy recovers from the coronavirus pandemic and economic crisis. Several billionaire investors have also recommended investing in bitcoin as they expand their portfolios’ exposure to the cryptocurrency. With the sheer amount of bitcoin Grayscale has been purchasing, Rooke noted:
Wall Street wants bitcoin, and they don’t care what Goldman Sachs has to say.
His tweet followed Goldman Sachs’ client call about bitcoin, during which the firm highlighted its negative outlook towards the cryptocurrency. Goldman Sachs told its clients that cryptocurrencies “are not an asset class,” ignoring a ruling by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) which found cryptocurrencies to be a commodity. Meanwhile, another major investment bank, JPMorgan Chase, is warming up to bitcoin and has reportedly begun providing banking services to crypto clients.
submitted by PresentType to sdsebitcoinblender [link] [comments]

Top 7 Bitcoin Scams

1. Malware Scams

Malware has long been the hallmark of many online scams. But with cryptocurrency, it poses an increased threat given the nature of the currency in and of itself.
Recently, a tech support site called Bleeping Computer issued a warning about cryptocurrency-targeting malware in hopes of saving customers from sending cryptocoins via transactions, reported Yahoo Finance.
"This type of malware, called CryptoCurrency Clipboard Hijackers, works by monitoring the Windows clipboard for cryptocurrency addresses, and if one is detected, will swap it out with an address that they control," wrote Lawrence Abrahams, computer forensics and creator of Bleeping Computer.
The malware, CryptoCurrency Clipboard Hijackers (which reportedly manages 2.3 million bitcoin addresses) switches addresses used to transfer cryptocoin with ones the malware controls - thus transferring the coins to the scammers instead. And, according to Asia Times, even MacOS malware has been connected to malware scams involving cryptocurrency investors using trusted sites like Slack and Discord chats - coined "OSX.Dummy."

2. Fake Bitcoin Exchanges - BitKRX

Surely one of the easiest ways to scam investors is to pose as an affiliate branch of a respectable and legitimate organization. Well, that's exactly what scammers in the bitcoin field are doing.
South Korean scam BitKRX presented itself as a place to exchange and trade bitcoin, but was ultimately fraudulent. The fake exchange took on part of the name of the real Korean Exchange (KRX), and scammed people out of their money by posing as a respectable and legitimate cryptocurrency exchange.
BitKRX claimed to be a branch of the KRX, a creation of KOSDAQ, South Korean Futures Exchange, and South Korean Stock Exchange, according to Coin Telegraph.
BitKRX used this faux-affiliation to ensnare people to use their system. The scam was exposed in 2017.

3. Ponzi Scheme - MiningMax

"Ponzi bitcoin scam" has got to be the worst combination of words imaginable for financial gurus. And, the reality is just as bad.
Several organizations have scammed people out of millions with Ponzi schemes using bitcoins, including South Korean website MiningMax. The site, which was not registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, promised to provide investors with daily ROI's in exchange for an original investment and commission from getting others to invest (basically, a Ponzi scheme). Apparently, the site was asking people to invest $3,200 for daily ROI's over two years, and a $200 referral commission for every personally recruited investor, reports claim.
MiningMax's domain was privately registered in mid-2016, and had a binary compensation structure. The fraudulent crypto-currency scam was reported by affiliates, resulting in 14 arrests in Korea in December of 2017.
Korea has long been a leader in technological developments - bitcoin is no exception. However, after recent controversy, it seems as though this is changing.
"But a lot of governments are looking at this very carefully," Yoo Byung-joon, business administration professor at Seoul National University and co-author of the 2015 research paper "Is Bitcoin a Viable E-Business?: Empirical Analysis of the Digital Currency's Speculative Nature," told South China Morning Post in January. "Some are even considering putting their currencies on the blockchain system. The biggest challenge facing bitcoin now is the potential for misuse, but that's true of any new technology."

4. Fake Bitcoin Scam - My Big Coin

A classic (but no less dubious) scam involving bitcoin and cryptocurrency is simply, well, fake currency. One such arbiter of this faux bitcoin was My Big Coin. Essentially, the site sold fake bitcoin. Plain and simple.
In early 2018, My Big Coin, a cryptocurrency scam that lured investors into sinking an alleged $6 million, was sued by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, according to a CFTC case filed in late January.
The CFTC case further details that the suit was due to "commodity fraud and misappropriation related to the ongoing solicitation of customers for a virtual currency known as My Big Coin (MBC)," further charging the scam with "misappropriating over $6 million from customers by, among other things, transferring customer funds into personal bank accounts, and using those funds for personal expenses and the purchase of luxury goods."
Among other things, the site fraudulently claimed that the coin was being actively traded on several platforms, and even mislead investors by claiming it was also partnered with MasterCard, according to the CFTC case.
Those sued included Randall Carter, Mark Gillespie and the My Big Coin Pay, Inc.

5. ICO Scam - Bitcoin Savings and Trust and Centra Tech

Still other scammers have used ICO's - initial coin offerings - to dupe users out of their money.
Along with the rise in blockchain-backed companies, fake ICOs became popular as a way to back these new companies. However, given the unregulated nature of bitcoin itself, the door has been wide open for fraud.
Most ICO frauds have taken place through getting investors to invest in or through fake ICO websites using faulty wallets, or by posing as real cryptocurrency-based companies.
Notably, $32 million Centra Tech garnered celebrity support (most famously from DJ Khaled), but was exposed for ICO fraud back in April of 2018, according to Fortune. The company was sued for misleading investors and lying about products, among other fraudulent activities.
The famous DJ wrote his support in a caption on Instagram back in 2017.
"I just received my titanium centra debit card. The Centra Card & Centra Wallet app is the ultimate winner in Cryptocurrency debit cards powered by CTR tokens!" Khaled wrote.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission even issued a warning in 2017 about ICO scams and faux investment opportunities, brought on by a slew of celebrities who promoted certain ICOs (like Paris Hilton and Floyd Mayweather Jr. to name a few).
"Any celebrity or other individual who promotes a virtual token or coin that is a security must disclose the nature, scope, and amount of compensation received in exchange for the promotion," the SEC wrote in an Investor Alert in 2017. "A failure to disclose this information is a violation of the anti-touting provisions of the federal securities laws."
Another example is Bitcoin Savings and Trust, which was fined $40.7 million in 2014 by the SEC for creating fake investments and using a Ponzi scheme to scam investors. According to Coin Telegraph, Trenton Shavers, the organization's leader, allegedly scammed investors into giving him 720,000 bitcoins promising a 7% weekly interest on investments - which he then used to pay back old investors and even fill his personal bank accounts.

6. Bitcoin Gold Scam - mybtgwallet.com

Nothing catches the eye of the naïve quite like the promise of gold - bitcoin gold, of course.
That is exactly what mybtgwallet.com did to unsuspecting bitcoin investors.
According to CNN, the bitcoin gold (BTG) wallet duped investors out of $3.2 million in 2017 by promising to allow them to claim their bitcoin gold. The website allegedly used links on a legitimate website (Bitcoin Gold) to get investors to share their private keys or seeds with the scam, as this old screenshot from the website shows.
Before the scam was done, the website managers (slash scammers) was able to get their hands on $107,000 worth of bitcoin gold, $72,000 of litecoin, $30,000 of ethereum, and $3 million of bitcoin, according to CNN.
Bitcoin Gold, the site's wallet used in the scam, began investigating shortly after, but the site remains controversial. Still, firm released a warning to bitcoin investors.
"It's worth reminding everyone that it will never be truly safe to enter your private key or mnemonic phrase for a pre-existing wallet into any online website," Bitcoin Gold wrote. "When you want to sweep new coins from a pre-fork wallet address, best practice is the same as after other forks: Send your old coins to a new wallet first, before you expose the private keys of the original wallet. Following this basic rule of private key management greatly reduces your risk of theft."

7. Pump and Dump Scam

While this type of scam is certainly not relegated to just bitcoin (thank you for the education, "The Wolf of Wall Street"), a pump-and-dump scam is especially dangerous in the internet space.
The basic idea is that investors hype up (or "pump up") a certain bitcoin - that is usually an alternative coin that is very cheap but high risk - via investor's websites, blogs, or even Reddit, according to The Daily Dot. Once the scammers pump up a certain bitcoin enough, skyrocketing its value, they cash out and "dump" their bitcoin onto the naïve investors who bought into the bitcoin thinking it was the next big thing.
Bittrex, a popular bitcoin exchange site, released a set of guidelines to avoid bitcoin pump-and-dump scams.
While "stackin' penny stocks" may sound like an appealing way to earn an extra buck (thanks to its glamorization by Jordan Belfort), messing in bitcoin scams is nothing to smirk at.

How to Avoid Bitcoin Scams

With the inevitable rise of bitcoin in current and coming years, it is becoming increasingly important to understand and be on the lookout for bitcoin scams that could cost you thousands. As more people become interested in Bitcoin, more people are also likely to try and pull off a scam.
There is no one formula to avoiding being scammed, but reading up on the latest bitcoin red flags, keeping information private, and double checking sources before investing in anything are good standard procedures that may help save you from being duped. Cryptocurrency can be a confusing topic even for the experienced Bitcoin enthusiast, so the more you read up on the world of Bitcoin, the more prepared you can be. After all, knowledge is power.
submitted by PresentType to bitcoinscaminfomore [link] [comments]

03-31 08:14 - 'The Best Forex Brokers for 2020 / Forex, or FX, trading is a more advanced type of investment that is best suited for experienced traders. If you’re well versed in day trading or options trading, forex may be a challenge...' by /u/michaelegginton removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-9min

'''
The Best Forex Brokers for 2020
Forex, or FX, trading is a more advanced type of investment that is best suited for experienced traders. If you’re well versed in day trading or options trading, forex may be a challenge worth accepting. Forex trading can be another way of diversifying your portfolio,
Due to the Dodd-Frank act, forex brokers operating in the U.S. must be certified with both the National Futures Association (NFA) and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). These regulations restrict the amount of leverage available to traders. All U.S. brokers can offer a maximum leverage of 50:1 for most currency pairs, with some more risky currencies having a maximum of 20:1. Because of this, many forex brokers no longer offer accounts to U.S.-based traders. This review only considers brokers that allow U.S. accounts. If you’re interested in exploring foreign options, our international forex brokers site may be of help. [link]1
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: michaelegginton
1: *ww.*s*rof*acel*rat*d.com/
Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

BITCOIN - WOW! Over 120% Profit In The Last 345 Days! CFTC to Hold an Open Commission Meeting on November 25 Bitcoin Operators Hit With Fraud Charges A BITCOIN AGENT HAS INFILTRATED THE US SENATE & CFTC - CRYPTO REGULATIONS SOON? BAKKT CFTC to Hold an Open Commission Meeting on October 16

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) publishes the Commitments of Traders (COT) reports to help the public understand market dynamics. Specifically, the COT reports provide a breakdown of each Tuesday’s open interest for futures and options on futures markets in which 20 or more traders hold positions equal to or On July 6, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced that it had given LedgerX, an institutional digital currency derivatives trading and clearing platform the permission to create a Swap Execution Facility (SEF). It has, thereby, approved bitcoin options trading for hedge funds, CTAs, and other institutional investors. The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission is reportedly after the owner of a crypto scheme, which misled over a thousand of its investors and clients. It seeks $572 million in financial penalties and restitution. $270M Worth Of BTC Stolen From More Than A Thousand Customers Аs per a recent report, the alleged Bitcoin trading pyramid Control-Finance […] The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has approved a new bitcoin derivatives trading platform. Bitnomial Exchange will list margined and physically delivered bitcoin futures and options. Besides Bitnomial, the CFTC has only approved a handful of other platforms to offer bitcoin derivatives trading, such as CME, Cboe, and Bakkt. Bitcoin and Other Virtual Currencies Today, fintech is driving innovation in financial markets across the globe. New technologies are wide-ranging in scope, from cloud computing and algorithmic trading to distributed ledgers to artificial intelligence and machine learning to network cartography, and many others.

[index] [2363] [1552] [1676] [470] [2305] [1153] [2627] [1462] [789] [1570]

BITCOIN - WOW! Over 120% Profit In The Last 345 Days!

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission held an open meeting on Monday, November 25, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. EST at its headquarters in Washington, DC. The witnesses were: The Honorable Jay Clayton, Chairman, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; and The Honorable J. Christopher Giancarlo, Chairman, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission ... The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Market Risk Advisory Committee (MRAC) held a public meeting on September 9 via teleconference. CFTC Commissioner Rostin Behnam is the sponsor of MRAC. The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Heath P. Tarbert held an open meeting on Wednesday, October 16 at 10:00 a.m. at its headquarters in Washington, DC. The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee (EEMAC) held a public meeting on November 7, 2019, at CFTC’s Washington, DC, headquarters.

#