AP

BendComprehensive410

So I’m a small business owner and my wife is an AP calculus teacher and between the two of us after taxes we make just under 200k when the accounting is done. I make sure to put absolutely everything through the business to offset as much profit as possible. In doing so I am able to consistently invest in savings/IRA/401k/401b/her pension and most importantly crypto. If I didn’t do this our income would be closer to 600k after taxes and we would get smacked. Try to open up a business in any way possible and funnel your W2 earnings through the company and most importantly get a wizard accountant! My brother is a commercial construction owner but before he was a top estimator and made 250 plus W2 but he started a marketing company and fed a ton of his W2 earnings through the business and end of year it was basically offset in getting his W2 taxes back.

420osrs

I'm going to have a controversial opinion. If ETFs are Increasing their supply and they are using Coinbase as the AP to buy the coins they would go from the exchange into the ETF. This does not decrease liquidity because they can go the other direction just as fast. If you mark the day the ETFs were available for tried and then look at the rough ETF size and then adjust the exchange decrease by the ETF holdings, the line is about flat. I'm not saying this is bearish or bullish. I'm just saying that this isn't as obvious of a sign that it appears. It's not like exchange reserves are going down by 500k BTC every six months and there will be zero liquidity by 2027. 

Legitimate_Towel6291

Ondo is clearly a scam, it brings nothing new to the table, KAS is unique with it solving the trilemma but has it any use case right now ? HBAR however and its foundation had this new member who joined last year called Australian Payments Plus. If you do even the slightest dive into AP+ and you see it controls the 4 pillars of digital payments here in Australia - OSKO EFTPOS PayID and BPay, NFA but its pretty obvious at least one of those rails uses HBAR which I suspect is OSKO due to it once being 3-4 minutes per transaction to now near instant.

Lord_Lucan7

[2011 :(](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczNUdq9mngiIwLlIkSZYHtNSxMI7DCbS5wu2I3X0PlXwPVTVbq8UDWfQ9aoJQVHmoRp47oxYPaMYh6-IAEGFUBgYDRUXa4NzEFASVMO1ojMkmHTTluz7I9k-ZBRcxiExknxtQWnDgqhwyGsgH4H7BKjAEQ=w700-h1556-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

Purple-MissA-7788

Dam this post is AP1 post. i trusted it before i see the post time.

WATCHESMADEMEPOOR

I actually sold my AP Royal Oak two years ago and put the $25 grand into BTC with the intention of buying the watch back and keeping some BTC for profit. Boy did I make out like a bandit. After all said and done I was left with .325 BTC and a nicer Royal Oak

TotalRepost

You don’t understand how ETFs work. Blackrock was the sponsor and manager of a separate legal entity called iShares Bitcoin trust. People buy and sell their shares of the trust under the ticker IBIT. In order to keep the price of ibit in line with the net asset value of the trust, authorized participants are approved by the SEC to create or destroy IBIT shares while buying or selling the underlying asset. Blackrock is not their own AP, that’s not allowed. The net changes in Bitcoin flows gets settled to the Coinbase account of the trust. Blackrock manages these relationships are takes care of any reporting. Blackrock didn’t buy anything

FerdaStonks

ETFs are a little more complicated than traditional stocks. The actual buying and selling of the underlying asset is done by entities known as Authorized Participants(APs). As an ETF is bought or sold throughout the trading day, it’s price moves with supply and demand of the ETF itself. The value of the actual underlying asset could move one way while the ETF moves the other. The differences in prices creates an arbitrage opportunity. APs are the ones actually adding or subtracting the asset from the ETF. As the net asset value(NAV) moves out of line with the ETFs price, APs can create or redeem shares of the ETF to get the NAV back to equilibrium with the share price. An AP can hand over the asset to the ETF in exchange for shares to sell, or hand over shares of the ETF in exchange for the underlying asset. It’s not that BlackRock themselves are buying or selling off BTC, the difference between share price and NAV creates constant arbitrage opportunities on both the upside and the downside and it’s the APs job to exchange shares for assets or assets for shares to keep the prices in line with the underlying.

Car_Chasing_Hobo

I literally saw some r/ conservative user calling AP News a Leftist media. Lmfao.

georgetonorge

No, that’s a widely shared tweet but it was debunked by the AP. https://apnews.com/article/8606880839

East-Day-7888

A representative from SWIFT agreed to be onstage at HederaCon. Why? Rob Allen mentioned the live testing this year, she didn't really confirm or respond to take ownership of that to be honest, it was just a moment. So you can read this in a couple of different ways. 1. Either Rob has info about this which he can't reveal, and is trying to encourage SWIFT and other participants to go public, and have managed to get them \*this\* close to doing so, including appearing at HederaCon onstage with the likes of Rob who represents AP+ (themselves no lightweight in the banking space), which they have agreed to do so in part because they are already a couple of years into testing, working with and from the sound of it selecting Hedera as a contender DLT at least for their operations... Or 2. High level enterprise and banking representatives such as this lady from SWIFT are out there just providing some civic utility function from the goodness of their hearts, and for some reason have agreed to appear at a ETH-rival's inaugural convention, and for some reason are willing to put themselves in a position where Rob can put them on the spit as being adjacent to Hedera in some way, Frankly, I don't buy #2. SWIFT would never put itself in a position that allows misrepresentation. That they don't wish to 100% confirm #1 is another thing. But appearing on stage and allowing themselves to be participant in that type of exposure, in my eyes is confirmation of #1 over #2. Of course, anything can happen, and that is why the ambiguity exists. Even if they go live, they might continue to be ambigious. Investors have to assess risk etc. But if this sort of thing was happening a couple of years ago, people would be running around, losing their shit and aping into HBAR like no one's business. Such is the water temperature around the crypto frog these days. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling\_frog](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog)

Agronopolopogis

> Trump understands that crypto is a revolutionary technology that literally cannot be stopped. # LMAO .. you won't read this but... **Self-Serving Actions in Trump’s 2025 Administration** Hey folks, just sharing some of the actions from Trump’s 2025 administration and, frankly, there are plenty of reasons to think his moves are anything but altruistic. Here’s a breakdown of some of the key points with direct source links: ## Policy Decisions That Seem Self-Serving - **Mass Pardons of Jan. 6 Rioters** On day one, Trump issued blanket pardons for over **1,500** individuals involved in the Jan. 6 attack. Many argue that this was less about justice and more about protecting his political base and sidelining accountability. *Sources:* [Reuters: Trump Pardons 2025](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-pardons), [ProPublica: Mass Pardons Analysis](https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-2025-pardons) - **Hardline Immigration Moves** Right after taking office, he shut down the mobile app that let migrants apply for legal entry (even canceling pre-approved appointments) and suspended U.S. refugee admissions. About 1,660 vetted Afghan refugees ended up stranded, and he declared a national emergency at the southern border to divert funds to enforcement. *Sources:* [Reuters: Immigration Shake-Up 2025](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-immigration), [AP News: Border Emergency Declared](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-border-emergency) - **Rolling Back Diversity Initiatives** Trump ordered the end of federal diversity training and mandated recognition of only gender assigned at birth, effectively rolling back protections for LGBTQ+ folks. Critics say this move caters to his base's culture-war agenda instead of promoting fairness. *Source:* [Brookings: Dismantling Diversity in 2025](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-diversity) - **Exiting the Paris Climate Accord Again** In a clear signal of his business-first approach, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord. This step has been widely criticized as putting short-term political interests and fossil-fuel allies ahead of global environmental responsibilities. *Source:* [Reuters: U.S. Exits Paris Accord Again](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-climate) ## Financial Moves That Raise Eyebrows - **Favoring Ultra-Wealthy Donors** Trump’s team has been notably small and wealthy. After relying on a handful of billionaires to fund his 2024 run, he gave many of them key roles in his government. Elon Musk, one of his major donors, now runs a new office for “government efficiency” despite his companies holding billions in federal contracts. *Sources:* [Campaign Legal Center: Donor Influence 2025](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-donors), [Brennan Center: Financial Conflicts in 2025](https://www.brennancenter.org/trump-2025-finance) - **Not Divesting from His Business Empire** Unlike previous presidents, Trump has kept his private business interests fully intact (no blind trust here), meaning he stands to profit directly when Trump-owned properties get patronized by foreign governments or others. This situation is a serious conflict-of-interest red flag. *Sources:* [Reuters: Trump and Business Interests](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-divestment), [Campaign Legal Center: Ethics Under Fire](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-ethics) ## Appointments Based on Loyalty Rather Than Merit - **Controversial Picks for Top Posts** Trump has been nominating folks with deep personal ties rather than independent experts. For example, he first put forward Rep. Matt Gaetz for Attorney General (despite Gaetz being under investigation) before switching to Pam Bondi, a known loyalist with her own baggage. *Sources:* [AP News: Gaetz Nomination Turmoil](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-gaetz), [ProPublica: Appointment Controversies](https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-2025-appointments) - **Wildcard National Security Choices** In a surprising move, Trump tapped Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence and brought back Stephen Miller as a Deputy Chief of Staff for immigration and security. Both picks have raised serious concerns about politicized intelligence and extreme policy measures. *Sources:* [Reuters: Wildcard Intelligence Picks](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-intelligence), [Brookings: National Security Under Trump](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-national-security) - **"Drain the Swamp" in Reverse** Instead of cleaning house, Trump’s been purging thousands of nonpartisan civil servants and filling agencies with loyalists and cronies. This shakeup undermines the normal checks and balances meant to prevent misuse of power. *Source:* [Campaign Legal Center: Swamp Drainage 2025](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-swarm) ## Leadership Style and Media Attacks - **Divisive Rhetoric & Misinformation** Rather than mending the political divide, Trump’s speeches continue to recycle debunked claims and personal grievances. His ongoing attacks on political opponents and revisionist narratives seem designed to keep his base fired up, even at the cost of national unity. *Source:* [Brookings: Rhetoric in 2025](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-rhetoric) - **Retaliation and “Enemies” Lists** Trump’s administration has been known to compile lists of “enemies” — targeting officials like Gen. Mark Milley and companies that have stopped supporting him. This vindictive approach suggests a presidency driven by personal vendettas rather than public service. *Sources:* [AP News: Enemies List Revealed](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-enemies), [Brennan Center: Retaliatory Governance](https://www.brennancenter.org/trump-2025-retaliation) - **Attacks on Independent Media** Trump has resumed his old playbook of demonizing the press, with proposals to restrict or defund major outlets like NPR and PBS. This, critics say, is an effort to control the narrative and avoid accountability rather than uphold democratic transparency. *Sources:* [Reuters: Media Under Attack](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-media), [Brookings: Free Press in Jeopardy](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-media-attacks) --- **Direct Source Links:** - [Reuters: Trump Pardons 2025](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-pardons) - [ProPublica: Mass Pardons Analysis](https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-2025-pardons) - [Reuters: Immigration Shake-Up 2025](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-immigration) - [AP News: Border Emergency Declared](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-border-emergency) - [Brookings: Dismantling Diversity in 2025](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-diversity) - [Reuters: U.S. Exits Paris Accord Again](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-climate) - [Campaign Legal Center: Donor Influence 2025](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-donors) - [Brennan Center: Financial Conflicts in 2025](https://www.brennancenter.org/trump-2025-finance) - [Reuters: Trump and Business Interests](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-divestment) - [Campaign Legal Center: Ethics Under Fire](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-ethics) - [AP News: Gaetz Nomination Turmoil](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-gaetz) - [ProPublica: Appointment Controversies](https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-2025-appointments) - [Reuters: Wildcard Intelligence Picks](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-intelligence) - [Brookings: National Security Under Trump](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-national-security) - [Campaign Legal Center: Swamp Drainage 2025](https://www.campaignlegal.org/trump-2025-swarm) - [Brookings: Rhetoric in 2025](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-rhetoric) - [AP News: Enemies List Revealed](https://apnews.com/article/trump-2025-enemies) - [Brennan Center: Retaliatory Governance](https://www.brennancenter.org/trump-2025-retaliation) - [Reuters: Media Under Attack](https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-2025-media) - [Brookings: Free Press in Jeopardy](https://www.brookings.edu/article/trump-2025-media-attacks) --- # But yeah.. altruistic

Koryos

You are correct for the most part in that most transactions are in exchanges without involving the ETF provider. However, ETFs also sell through authorized market participants (APs) who can request direct redemptions from the ETF providers (e.g., BlackRock, Vanguard) if the AP’s own clients sell the products that are based on the ETF, and if they prefer direct redemptions at NAV instead of selling in the exchange. In such a case, the ETF provider sells the underlying securities and reduces the amount of ETF shares outstanding.

FloatingFaintly

Again, im just going to use chatGPT to respond. You ARE WRONG. I'm angry and annoyed because peopel like you spreading misinformation is fucking maddening. Addressing Their Argument The document they provided describes the general ETF creation/redemption process, which applies to most ETFs that hold baskets of stocks or bonds. However, Bitcoin ETFs function differently because they only hold Bitcoin and are structured for direct Bitcoin ownership. Why Their Argument is Wrong BTCC Uses Direct Bitcoin Holdings, Not Derivatives or Proxies Unlike synthetic ETFs, Purpose Bitcoin ETF directly holds Bitcoin in cold storage. Each ETF unit is backed by actual Bitcoin, not by cash or derivatives. Creation and Redemption in Bitcoin ETFs Works Differently In a Bitcoin ETF, Authorized Participants (APs) deliver cash to the ETF issuer (Purpose Investments). The ETF issuer then purchases Bitcoin and holds it in custody with a third party (such as Gemini Trust). When investors redeem shares, the ETF sells Bitcoin to return cash to the AP. Public Proof of Bitcoin Holdings Purpose Bitcoin ETF publicly discloses its Bitcoin holdings daily. You can check its actual Bitcoin balance through blockchain verification. The Bitcoin is held by a regulated custodian, preventing the fraud seen in FTX. What About Arbitrage and ETF Pricing? The document your friend linked describes how stock ETFs use baskets of stocks for arbitrage. Purpose Bitcoin ETF doesn’t need a “basket” since it only holds Bitcoin. APs still facilitate arbitrage, but it happens by converting cash to Bitcoin and vice versa. Final Verdict Purpose Bitcoin ETF directly holds Bitcoin in cold storage. The person arguing against it is misapplying a general ETF framework to a specialized spot Bitcoin ETF, which is structured differently.

SOCALZAZA

You sound like someone who’s terrified to wear an AP in public

Chuckychinster

Fox? Newsweek? Newsmax? They are just a few of the crazy right wing media conglomerates. Fox is the most watched news channel in the US. By definition that alone validates my point. Now CNN, AP, NPR are sanewashing and watering down his actions. You actually have to dig deep to find accurate fact checks of some of the lies going on now.

Comfortable_Way4560

Gaza Province, Mozambique [AP](https://apnews.com/article/gaza-condoms-fact-check-trump-50-million-26884cac6c7097d7316ca50ca4145a82)

Decent-Amphibian-419

I mean, one little AP isn't gonna kill you.

StatisticalMan

This is not for individual investors. It is limited to authorized participants the instituional investors who can create and redeem shares now. The only change is AP who currently create and redeem shares in cash will now be able to create and redeem shares using Bitcoin which means more efficient arbitrage and thus better ETF price tracking.

StatisticalMan

The SEC currently prohibits it. AP are required to provide cash and be paid cash which requires the ETF to buy or sell Bitcoins as needed. This makes the ETFs less efficient. So this is a good improvement but people are taking it way out of context. The direct change for individual investors is absolutely nothing. They can't create or redeem shares now for cash. If the rule changes they also won't be able to create or redeem shares for Bitcoins either.

StatisticalMan

Before people get ahead of themselves this would be **limited to AP (authorized participants)** meaning people who currently can buy and sell directly with the ETF provider to engage in arbitrage. As in massive institutional investors. Individual investors would not get this. In-kind redemptions and issuance however allows for more efficient markets.

AlabamaHaole

😂😂😂. I think so. It’s the only memecoin this cycle I’ve seen mentioned on the news and late night talk shows. The AP and news outlets (real ones like NBC) are writing articles about it. Between that and the AI agent narrative that is strong this cycle, I think it’s a winner.

AlabamaHaole

Doge was at a marketcap of 500M on Christmas of 2020. Within a few months it was close to 100B. Don't underestimate bull run mania can do. This cycle, Fartcoin is the only memecoin I've been seeing everywhere. It was on the Colbert show. The AP is writing news articles about it. Economists are tweeting about it. Have fun staying poor.

shaggadally

Would be sweet if I could buy a Rolex or AP with Bitcoin!

dataCollector42069

Ah looks like I need a vault. Per [https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/7558997757332-Reddit-Vault-Basics#h\_01GVH9Y9B78AP41GFG9KS79SJH](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/7558997757332-Reddit-Vault-Basics#h_01GVH9Y9B78AP41GFG9KS79SJH), I need to wait to get something first before making a vault. 2k MOON bag hodler feel like of all things I own, this is the one thing that can really take off.

Agreeable_Gas_4378

Check out Why You coming fast guy ​ 4RkMw7srNaVfmxSwh5AP9ih9es7NFYbMCUA4YK7spump

JivanP

That site is a state-run educational resource that follows exam board specifications in the UK. All UK textbooks say the same thing. If that doesn't constitute "reputable" to you, then your goalposts are too close together. The definition of "average" *is* "a measure of central tendency". The [UK National Curriculum](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-mathematics-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-mathematics-programmes-of-study) emphasises this, too: > **Statistics** > > Pupils should be taught to: > > - calculate and interpret the mean as an average If you only consider American resources reputable, just google "AP Statistics average definition"and you will find plenty of resources saying the same, [such as this one](https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/ap-stats/average). Dictionaries agree also: - [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average): "a single value (such as a mean, mode, or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values" - [Wiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/average): "(statistics) Any measure of central tendency, especially any mean, the median, or the mode." Wiktionary elaborates: > (mathematics, statistics): The term average may refer to the statistical mean, median or mode of a batch, sample, or distribution, or sometimes any other measure of central tendency. Statisticians and responsible news sources are careful to use whichever of these specific terms is appropriate. In common usage, average refers to the arithmetic mean. It is, however, a common rhetorical trick to call the most favorable of mean, median and mode the "average" depending on the interpretation of a set of figures that the speaker or writer wants to promote.

c0mbucha

You deserve some upvotes because its an interesting topic and a unique post in a flood of repetitive "news" posts. But I am not sure whats the point. You could go to a trusted website / news source and they would already now mark ai videos as ai. How is the video going in the blockchain? And how is it verified and how are mistakes reversed? Some social media sites already have "community notes" so a video or post can be disputed Could there ever be a blockchain / service that is as trusted as lets say AP or DPA or Reuters in not putting out fake content? maybe. But is there really a problem that is being solved?!

R4ID

>It's not. Cant wait for you to say some of the dumbest shit ever, here we go. > Ripple controls all or at least most validator nodes Ripple runs 2... 2 validators atm, so what in the heck are you talking about? https://xrpscan.com/validators located here https://xrpscan.com/validator/nHU4bLE3EmSqNwfL4AP1UZeTNPrSPPP6FXLKXo2uqfHuvBQxDVKd and https://xrpscan.com/validator/nHUon2tpyJEHHYGmxqeGu37cvPYHzrMtUNQFVdCgGNvEkjmCpTqK the XRPL requires and 80% super majority, can you explain how 2 validators is a super majority ? >how is this not centralized? Come up with a theoretical or practical example centralization for the XRPL. Explain how Ripple could freeze an XRP transaction, censor a user/transaction, Create more XRP, Force a code update on the validators, doublespend on the network. When you realize none of this is possible because it is decentralized, you will have the answer to your question. >Also the top 50 addresses hold over 50% of the current supply. Non proof of stake network = token ownership is irrelevant. Apply your incorrect logic to BTC and its PoW network, If I own a lot of BTC can I freeze BTC transactions? Create more BTC? force code updates on the network? the same is true of the XRPL/XRP, owning tokens gives no power/governance because its not a proof of stake.

Leo-MathGuy

I self studied AP Stats I know what polls are, this one doesn’t have any data except the amount of people. You are completely right :)

saigatenozu

just don't be on AP while you're in the fast lane.

Smiling_Jack_

Sudden nostalgia of AP Calculus class.

BagHolder9001

Coinbase AP not #1 on top charts, retail not here yet

The_Captain_Planet22

What source do you like? Wall st Journal? [https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-business-plan-left-a-trail-of-unpaid-bills-1465504454](https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-business-plan-left-a-trail-of-unpaid-bills-1465504454) The AP? [https://apnews.com/article/10bbe40a86774bac9ad1fbd3a936c808](https://apnews.com/article/10bbe40a86774bac9ad1fbd3a936c808) The IBEW? [https://ibew.org/media-center/Articles/17daily/1703/170308\_AnotherContractor](https://ibew.org/media-center/Articles/17daily/1703/170308_AnotherContractor) Faux News? [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dozens-of-lawsuits-accuse-trump-of-not-paying-his-bills-reports-claim](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dozens-of-lawsuits-accuse-trump-of-not-paying-his-bills-reports-claim) Trump himself? [https://x.com/atrupar/status/1852458529195471072?ref\_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1852458529195471072%7Ctwgr%5E5712bcdd370561ae0cc9ffabb44d64833d53d6fb%7Ctwcon%5Es1\_c10&ref\_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Ftrump-tells-supporters-dont-pay-your-dn-bill-in-meandering-rally-speech%2F](https://x.com/atrupar/status/1852458529195471072?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1852458529195471072%7Ctwgr%5E5712bcdd370561ae0cc9ffabb44d64833d53d6fb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Ftrump-tells-supporters-dont-pay-your-dn-bill-in-meandering-rally-speech%2F)

Dettol-tasting-menu

They are not the same thing. Once your coins are locked up in the Coinbase prison it’s locked up pretty much forever, until the AP redeems it. You can never send it to another person, you cannot use it to open a lightning channel, you cannot zap and tip people on Nostr and Fountain, your coin in custody is exactly that, in custody, a jail cell. I just sent some sats to Mullvad VPN yesterday to top up my service. I’m half a world away and it’s magical that there was zero middle man in between and Mullvad got my sats and provided me with a useful service without me having to ask anyone for approval. It’s truly liberating. Let your coins be free people. Self custody isn’t hard. That’s what Bitcoin is supposed to be.

blackeagle77

[was hoping it was gonna be this guy but made of glass......cos something something transparency ](https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2014/03/07/07/Satoshi-Nakamoto-AP.jpg)

Outrageous_Word_999

I hear this a lot, but I never felt this way. Even as a teenager I had long range plans, post-college, and wondered where dollar bills came from. No one could explain the Fed / Inflation to me, but I was always questioning. Definitely there is a big mental difference between average kids and AP kids.

Dettol-tasting-menu

They hold bitcoin 1:1 yes. But if I hold ETF and decide to sell, my stock broker Charles Schwab will not and cannot redeem the bitcoin from Blackrock. Charles Schwab will simply match me with a new buyer. On the ETF register they simply delete my name and replace it with the new buyer name. No Bitcoin is moved. Bitcoin will only move when there’s a lot of selling pressure, so that the Authorised Participant such as JPMorgan choose to redeem the Bitcoin from blackrock’s custodian which is Coinbase. And even then the Bitcoin is with AP and it’s up to JPMorgan to decide how to sell and who to sell the Bitcoin to. You and me and any ETF holding will never get back our Bitcoin. We will only be paid in fiat for our sales. If JPM decided, nah I’m happy to pay off the selling pressure with fiat and keep the BTC, or decide to sell the BTC to Goldman, they can choose to do so. In the end, we the individual investors will not get back Bitcoin.

Dettol-tasting-menu

My scenario is if majority of bitcoin is captured by ETF. AP selling / redeeming bitcoin only when there is overwhelming sell pressure on ETF. In the current direction, ETF will only go up. Once it’s inside Coinbase it can no longer be used in lightning network, it can no longer be used to issue Fedimint ecash, it’s no longer permissionless. It’s no longer real bitcoin until it’s being redeemed again, which only AP such as JPMorgan can do. To retail customers like us, we still nominally own the bitcoin but that locked up bitcoin has lost so many functionality and freedom its at best a second class citizen.

JeromePowellLovesMe

No. It wouldn't. That fee has to cover not only their in house fee and P&L but cover custody and clearing at Coinbase but also their AP (they don't do it for free). The fee is an annualized rate. It's not 0.25% for every transaction. Around 5% of is value trades in the 6.5 hours of lit markets Monday through Friday. Even if the 29M average share volume is an in easy 100 share blocks, you are processing 290,000 transactions over 390 minutes. 743 transactions a minute of lit market. That's the average. ~$52 million in fees collected isn't enough to cover 58 million individual transactions, pay their overhead, pay the custody services and their APs.

JeromePowellLovesMe

You can't match ETF purchases and sales with Coinbase exchange data or on chain data for that matter. 1. BlackRock is a major investor in most publicly traded and private miners. They didn't self mine like Fidelity but what they did was become a major creditor and equity investor in miners. The custodian doesn't need to obtain the asset; they custody it's location. 2. The ETF only charges like 0.25% or so right now. That would not cover trade fees during lit markets based on every ETF share traded by their APs if they were matched 1:1 on CB's exchange. They likely true up only net flows throughout lit sessions as communicated by the AP. 3. As far as I know you can short the ETF. If it's a marked short ticket (open or close), they wouldn't need to true up the net outflow. Meaning rehypothecation should have no effect and, after giving this significant thought recently, options on ETFs will have little to no impact on spot.

Chum181

$AP (Agent Points) from Agent301. Telegram mini-app blowing up on Twitter and Reddit atm

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; A New Jersey court judge ruled that Coinbase shareholders can proceed with a lawsuit against the crypto exchange for misleading representations about the likelihood of an SEC enforcement action. The lawsuit, led by Swedish pension fund Sjunde AP-Fonden, accuses Coinbase and its executives of failing to accurately disclose the risks of an SEC complaint and the implications of a potential bankruptcy filing. This decision marks another setback for Coinbase in its ongoing legal battles with the SEC. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

ScalpularComa

I was only 17 bro chill. The biggest worry on my mind was passing AP U.S. history

zetsubou_no_reddit

I came in 1st out of 5 on my AP US Gov test in high school

Generic_Globe

My point is that at very minimum the most basic use case of dApps would be a forum type thing. And we are here discussing crypto in reddit. A company that went public and censors whatever the mods of each subreddit want for whatever reason the mods want. [Turkey blocks access to Instagram. It's in response to removal of posts on Hamas chief, reports say | AP News](https://apnews.com/article/turkey-instagram-access-blocked-771ed7c9bfcd5e1019eeae6f02e59693) This type of news should not be a thing when there is a system for decentralized applications. And yet, there is nothing. The more liberating thing about decentralization is censorship resistance. All modern social media is censored. And when it can't be censored to the will of the governments of the world, it is simply banned. So why has no one taken the task to develop social media on ethereum? I feel like it's vaporware. In 2017, I believed it was too early. But I have waited 7 years and there is nothing to show. I am not a hater at all. People get defensive online. I have 779 ETH. You don't accumulate this much being a hater. But realistically, how long does it take to develop a decentralized product? Facebook started in 2004. Really blew up around 2008. I would say Ethereum has had more than enough time to show a working product.

MittenSplits

They've had outflows, but outflows have to be big enough to trigger a batch of coins actually being sold back by the AP's. I forget what the number is, but long story short. If they don't hit a certain threshold of outflow volume, then it just gets offset by the next days inflows. Then, when sufficient inflows happen, they buy a "lot" of Bitcoin all at once

ttttppp

Educate yourself. The deficit was $45B+. It’s actually much higher if you fix the roads and everything that desperately need to be fixed. Roads need to be fixed and not ignored and so does our failing infrastructure. https://apnews.com/article/california-budget-deficit-gov-gavin-newsom-8f502d57d00d551c0b6b6331367f7a25#:~:text=(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20California’s%20budget%20deficit,the%20world’s%20fifth%2Dlargest%20economy. https://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/fix_our_roads_fact_sheet_0.pdf Just because we are one of the top economies doesn’t mean the money is being managed correctly. Jesus I’m shocked about how so many people can’t read and understand basic stuff and think because the economy is massive it doesn’t mean that the money isn’t being mismanaged, stolen, and wasted. This is what the failure of schools look like, the same arguments you are making. Complete nonsense arguments. Both sides (liberal and conservative) completely disagree with what you’re saying.

TumasaurusTex

1219 6912 10800 financial center parkway Little Rock, AR 72211 Suite 175 5019181800 RAPE: NEW YORK (AP) — A jury found Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House. The former president made hay of that distinction when he sued Carroll in June, alleging Carroll defamed him by saying she was raped in a media interview after the verdict. The counterattack was quickly shot down. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled in August that the jury verdict showed Carroll’s rape allegation was “substantially true” and dismissed the counterclaim. Stealing from charities: NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today released the following statement after Donald J. Trump was forced to pay more than $2 million in court-ordered damages to eight different charities for illegally misusing charitable funds at the Trump Foundation for political purposes. Dictator desires and worship: Trump just a few days ago. “Christians get out and vote. Just this time,” he urged. “You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years. You know what? It’ll be fixed. It’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore my beautiful Christians.” Kim Jong Un: “He’s a tough guy. Hey, when you take over a country, tough country, tough people, and you take it over from your father—if you could do that at 27-years old, I mean, that’s 1 in 10,000 that could do that.” Vladimir Putin: “If he [Putin] says great things about me, I’m going to say great things about him. I’ve already said, he is really very much of a leader. I mean, you can say, ‘Oh, isn’t that a terrible thing’—the man has very strong control over a country. Now, it’s a very different system, and I don’t happen to like the system. But certainly, in that system, he’s been a leader, far more than our president has been a leader.” “You can say, ‘Oh, isn’t that a terrible thing,’ I mean, the man has very strong control over his country.” Rodrigo Duterte: “I just wanted to congratulate you because I am hearing of the unbelievable job on the drug problem.” Xi Jinping: “President Xi is a brilliant man. If you went all over Hollywood to look for somebody to play the role of President Xi, you couldn’t find [them], there’s nobody like that: the look, the brain, the whole thing.” “President Xi is like central casting. There’s nobody in Hollywood that could play the role of President Xi — the look, the strength, the voice.” Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: “Congratulations to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on his big and well deserved victory in Turkey. I know him well, he is a friend, and have learned firsthand how much he loves his Country and the great people of Turkey, which he has lifted to a new level of prominence and respect!” Saddam Hussein: “He was a bad guy — really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights. They didn’t talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism.” Viktor Orbán: “There’s a man, Viktor Orbán, did anyone ever hear of him? He’s probably, like, one of the strongest leaders anywhere in the world.” The only place he’s not being prosecuted is by a judge HE appointed. Trump is charged with 40 counts of taking classified documents and obstructing efforts to get them back. Special counsel Jack Smith’s indictments show boxes full of highly secret materials sitting unsecured in ballrooms and bathrooms and closets at Trump’s private club and home, Mar-a-Lago. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, says the entire classified documents case should be thrown out because the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith was unconstitutional.

Former_Friendship842

The image is not flipped, genius. It even has an AP watermark on it.

CletusVanDayum

Because commie lovers write history books. I remember my AP US history book describing FDR as a paraplegic whose battle with polio left him with a spine of steel. Like, gimme a history lesson, not a fucking love letter.

makeasnek

Decentralizing social media, particularly media platforms like YouTube has a problem: monetization. Nostr has a potential solution though. Over the last two months alone, their users have “zapped” (tipped/donated) other users around 950K (nearly 1 mil!) USD worth via lightning and that number continues to grow. And it doesn’t just make it easy to pay content creators, but to also put a portion of your “zaps” towards the relay you use or development of the software if you want. If you have a nostr account, you can easily tie it to a lightning address to send/receive tips, nostr doesn’t take a fee. Relays can also portion out a bit of their zaps for the people who publish the most engaging content on their relay. The possibilities are quite extensive. And because it’s over lightning, zaps happen instantly and for pennies or less in fees. Though, you can use nostr without zaps at all. For those unfamiliar with nostr, it’s a decentralized social media software much like ActivityPub/mastodon, the main use right now is as a twitter/instagram clone but there’s also a reddit-style section being built up as well. Video hosting itself could be done by relays or through a P2P system similar to IPFS. Moderation abilities from the perspective of the instance/relay are identical to activitypub/mastodon. But one bonus if that if your relay goes down, you don’t lose your identity, since your identity and relay are separate. And if you change apps or relays (you are typically connected to multiple relays), all your content moves with you seamlessly. And the payment/zap infrastructure is all decentralized, relays don’t ever custody or manage the payments. If you tip a content creator, it goes directly from you to them. The lightning network has basically limitless transaction capacity. If you have cash app, it supports lightning, so you can already send zaps (you will need different apps to receive zaps though because cash app doesn’t support the LNURL standard). Strike natively supports it. And because it’s lightning, it works in every country automatically. Long-term, if I am a content creator, which “fedi”-type system is going to be attractive to me? One where users can send me tips and mircopayments or one where they can’t? This is why I think nostr is going to win out long-term over AP/Mastodon. Mastodon could add this kind of functionality but I don’t get the impression they’re open to it. People may not want to commit to yet another $5/month subscription to a YouTuber’s patreon or nebula or whatever, but they are happy to tip 1-10c after watching a video. So there’s a psychological beauty to micropayments as well. As some random person I have made like 7c on tips this month, but I’ve also given out plenty to other people.

OldRedditt

[Really?](https://apnews.com/article/alaska-willow-oil-drilling-project-upheld-abf128e53eaf053005bffe771b7af574#:~:text=JUNEAU%2C%20Alaska%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94,groups%20swiftly%20vowed%20to%20fight) The Dems fight climate change no different than DiCaprio. Fly around in their private jets while trying to tell everyone else how to limit their carbon footprint. I don't want to get into a huge political Reddit fight but to me, it doesn't feel like they care. I understand if you think this type of strategy works on some people, but it feels like a lot of hot air.

MetallicGray

There isn’t a single statement you made that is true in that comment… in fact, all the statements you made regarding the election have been debunked and proven false over and over and over again for four years now.  They were not alternative electors. It was illegal, they were fake electors and broke the law (the irony in you claim there was shady stuff hopefully isn’t missed there). All the other things you listed, like I said, were proved for four years now to be false. Also, new agencies call elections… and “calls” have absolutely nothing to do at all with an election or any official proceeding. It’s quite literally just AP News calculating that “at this point, based on multiple factors and the data we have received it’s extremely unlikely that X candidate can get enough votes to win, so we call it for Y candidate”. But that means nothing for official proceedings.  Trump didn’t just decide the night of to contest too. You realize for *months* he was planning multiple avenues to overturn the election… the “shadiness” was just his lie to attempt to justify delaying it and negating it. The most damning part is *there is literal evidence and proof that Trump knew he lost and that there was no election fraud*. I’m curious why you even think Trump is pro crypto in the first place.  Also, he didn’t *just* present *fake* electors… he also went down other avenues like trying to fudge state vote numbers and using Pence to stop the official proceeding.  Like it’s not just a casual thing of “oh he just had some other people in the room, no biggie”. It’s literally for months before the election he planned and explored multiple avenues to negate the free election. And there’s hard evidence of this.  You’re not being gaslit when the reality of these things is proven over and over again. You’re being gaslit by the people who keep telling you the same regurgitated lies and have yet to provide any proof of those lies in the past four years. 

Who_is_Satoshi

Being an AP is a license to buy and sell Bitcoin. Their job related to the ETF is to arbitrage price discrepancies to keep the ETF close to underlying asset (BTC).  I never suggested the APs were gambling with ETF money. I'm saying they most likely were front running the market with their own money, because they had a license to do so, and had insider info knowing that ETFs were approved before everyone else knew.

FistyFisticuffs

No, if I used some bitboy algo you'd see something unoffensive but milquetoast for everyone reading. My question is: what is your actual critique? Because what I get is that you don't understand the philosophical framework and the implementation of said philosophical framework in practice (critique number 1), which doesn't actually conflict with the argument I'm making, but also doesn't actually address it. Describing the current implementation is all well and good but that's not the fundamental purpose of anything, that's the current implementation of a black box that may or may not have a similar fundamental purpose. I'm talking about the "why" being fundamentally in conflict with state interference, full stop. State endorsement creates the precursor to a CBDC. State prohibition creates a unilateral mandate to use prohibitionist policies and enforcement to control something it cannot, objectively, control. How cryptocurrencies accomplish its goals is inherently not monolithic and indeed, is not monolithic. BTC and the EVM chains and XMR are very different implementations of what began as a broad proof of concept. The importance, and purpose, is not about the actual manner by which it accomplishes what it sets out to do, but rather, that it is able to do so without interference or coercion, and some have done so more successfully than others. Either way, having the government picking winners and losers is, in a network that is distributed at scale and diffused sufficiently, going to be a fool's errand that would result in few winners but the hucksters and authoritarians who are the shovel-sellers in a gold rush, the arms providers to the condottiere. Oh, and also, all your examples carries the implication of "without official sanction from the state", which is my point. I can deploy code onto some chain and send a transaction or call with said code without prior permission or even knowledge. It doesn't matter if the proposed authority is currently in favor of me being able to do so. The support of the state is permission injected into a permissionless system and inherently incompatible. In fact, law enforcement in the US have had to do a lot of shoehorning to even make the smallest dent in what is a system that exists in a manner that involves millions and are spread out cross more jurisdictions that they are able to cooperate with. You are talking about what an implementation of crypto can do. You missed what it represents in the grand scheme of permissioned and permissionless transmission of data, value, or anything in a manner that is not dependent on the state saying 'trust me'. The argument against my view of legitimacy does exist, but it's incredibly rare to see anyone actually make a full throated idealist counterfactual of how statehood works. You also dangle a question that is left begging: who are "the people" that you speak of? It's an abstraction that is frequently treated as something that is more than the heuristic that it really is, but in reality the commonality of the many ways it has been defined is an inherent, top-down view from the gaze of the state, a label placed upon individuals who may or may not share much commonality otherwise except the one in question. The state, which is also an abstraction but one consisting of those who take the label up voluntarily, makes "the people" legible by reducing them down to simplified facets of complex individuals and further groups them together regardless of the consent or even knowledge of those grouped within. Are you part of "the people"? Am I? If I move to Canada tomorrow, do I cease to be a part of "the people"? If I'm working in China for the next 6 month, a country that does not naturalize except in extraordinary, individual cases and is effective designed so that the state is the absolute authority in saying who is and isn't part of "the people" as a constitutional matter - defined outside of the text itself, by the way, and in a way that is convenient to the ruling party but alien to all others who are literate, regardless of language, am I part of "the people" as you put it? I obviously have opinions, but circumstances out of my control would make it that I would need to choose between 'putting food on my table' and 'casting a vote', but my physical presence elsewhere is also by definition temporary. Plenty of individuals will cast a vote having put far less thought into the ramifications, long term implications, relevant priors, nuanced - or unnuanced, but personal views I hold. Participatory democracy alone is not sufficient, [because what you end up with is autocracy under the veneer of democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_democratic_dictatorship). It also justifies the sort of violence used to keep the "mass line" which allows the state to maintain exactly that: the caricatured and thin veil of representation over the abstraction that is 'the people'. Even the founders are cognizant of using 'the people' as heuristic - which explains why it's only used as dicta, rhetoric, and anywhere that is defined via contrast instead of a standalone concept. Do you really believe in what you just wrote? The legitimate use of violence transcends ideologies of systems of government in power. It also conveniently creates the outer boundaries of the exertion of power and legitimacy, irredentism aside. It's the same justification under democratic schemes as well as authoritarian schemes, from Makhnovshchina (which is probably the purest form of a diffused, participatory democracy in recent memory that was implemented over a substantial territory. It was attacked by both ultra-monarchists and Bolsheviks at the same time and was overrun within 3 years) to Mongolia under Ungern-Sternberg, which manages to be to the right of even the monarchists. The unifying characteristic is the unilateral and justified use of violence as the enforcement mechanism that backstops authority, exercised without challenge on a systemic level. You can sue (a very small subset) of federal agents, you can't sue the policymakers that ordered and enabled their deliberate bad acts. Prosecutors have absolute immunity, something never mentioned in law or the Constitution on the federal level. That is the hallmark of legitimacy - never having to say that you're sorry, or you did anything wrong at all. And I think you fundamentally misunderstand what a university is for, but many, or dare I say most, Americans make this mistake. It's not a trade school - law school, med school are trade schools, universities are not set up in that manner and make for poor venues of practical education. What it is good at is teaching you how to think, analyze, and subject your own world views first critically. The most important course, in that sense, was the 1 semester course that I took at community college when I was 16 because my general disregard for the value of busywork meant that my school decided that I couldn't take the AP tests for future savings on taking pointless college courses of little substance. The class was ENG 103, and the subject was logical fallacies. I didn't go to a "university" in that my undergrad institution was not a research institution, and my law school I regard as a trade school. At the same time, nobody gives a shit after you graduate where you went and what classes you took anyway. It's also a terrible authority to appeal to since getting into university is pretty easy, but getting something out of it, well, that's a whole other story, and I wonder if you half-assed that like you half-assed your critiques.

brianddk

Fake? I've checked 5 different sources CNBC, Forbes, Yahoo, Coindesk, AP, and not one has an image, link, or anything related to this. Found something claiming to be the campaign site on Wikipedia, but I'm not certain that is legit either. Nothing on the fake campaign site has a crypto link on it. If it is real, Trump is fighting like hell to hide the fact.

atzee

GALA commenting on its security breach -> https://twitter.com/GoGalaGames/status/1792727587460104377?t=AP78Q04OZuIBfi2qTFmHzQ&s=19

SoftChard6582

We didn't have mommy and dad to teach us. No wealthy family. No posh schools. What is AP?

penceluvsthedick

The funny thing is that the longer you are in the bitcoin space the more you realize most bitcoiners don’t know anything about how finance works. This is a very brief moment in time the 13f caught. JPM is an AP which means at times they’ll hold ETF shares on their balance sheet. They’ll also be short shares on their balance sheet too.

HBAR_10_DOLLARS

I’m thinking Hedera is involved here. There was some news leaked a few days ago from a private meeting in NYC where Citi was presenting on the topic “building the future of finance on Hedera” alongside Hedera GC members Abrdn and AP+ (look them up)

Possible-Magazine23

No exactly. JPM is an AP, aka market marker or liquidity provider. 13F filing just indicate what they have on hand as of EOD 3.31.2024. They're not really investing in it for themselves.

Terrible-Orchid-4274

James Seyffart: Just FYI everyone. JPM, Susquehanna (which also owns these ETFs and was all over this site last week) and others are just market makers and/or AP's. Their ownership isn't necessarily indicative of anything other than this is how many shares they had on 3/31/24. [James Seyffart‘s Post](https://x.com/jseyff/status/1789026505013506157?s=46&t=lGLMsTP4jO7Tki7VvM_U-Q)

soks86

Nah, the matching is done by an exchange using a retail product (the ETF itself). The Authorized Participants trade there too. The Authorized Participants will create/destroy shares based on supply/demand the price of the ETF relative to the price of BTC. There is no sell order that can force them to sell BTC because "selling" means giving an ETF share to someone who now owns the ETF. The creation and destruction is strictly a money making, statistically driven, process for Authorized Participants. The larger the premium for buying the ETF the more likely an ETF holder will sell and the more likely an AP will sell their shares or create more shares so they can sell more.

HOS-SKA

That had better not fucking be Patricia from AP, I swear... 

pdlvw

A lot of questions. Only an authorized participant (AP) deals with an ETF issuer to create and redeem shares. The AP gives money to the issuer, the issuer buys bitcoin and hands it over to the trust. The trust hands it over to the custodian. After that process, the ETF issuer hands over the new created shares to the AP. The AP sells the shares on the second market.

stanley_fatmax

Are you confident? This is the citation: *Paul Buchheit, the former Google engineer who created Gmail, works at the company's offices in Mountain View, Calif., in Dec. 10, 1999. Buchheit was the 23rd employee hired at Google, a company that now employs more than 180,000 people. (April Buchheit via AP)*

ShoulderSeason

That’s in the AP class.

FullPortDildos

Who cares that they're an AP? That's literally their job. That's what half of their business is. You think this is a business where the only products they offer are products they personall think are great? Their job is to provide access to markets. You want to buy the Bitcoin ETF? Fine, we'll sell it to you. We think it's fucking stupid, but hey ... your money. How much you want?

Professional-Swim-69

Yep I used it all the time, Hotmail was the defacto standard (not even AOL as it didn't exist), ICQ was your messaging. Linux distribution Slackware, every single technology company today, everyone, build their products on Linux (or FreeBSD), your car, your fridge, your thermostat, the WiFi AP, the firewalls and routers connecting you, the world owes Torvalds for its contribution, we have a digital economy because of him. For good and bad I know Those modems you are talking about? I set them up at an ISP, 16 modem blades per chassis and a ComputeOne multiport card to connect these to a server. Cisco 4507 to the ISP running BGP with my ARIN AS, I'm sorry I'm ranting here, miss those days

StrivingPlusThriving

They are an AP for ibit, the Blackrock BTC ETF. In my opinion, it's unfortunate. But Bitcoin is for enemies.

Brettanomyces78

I'd like to hear some actual reasons why they're not one of the best news outlets. AP and NPR are about as neutral and fact based as they come in the US (add Reuters for non-US). That's not to say they're perfect or without fault, of course, but on balance and compared to everything else? Sure.

Inthewirelain

Yes that very quote is the one I mean >The pair took refuge in the news agency’s downtown headquarters, leaving a media mob outside. In AP’s report, published late on Thursday, the alleged currency mastermind said his English was imperfect and that the Newsweek reporter misinterpreted him when he said was “no longer involved in that”. >“I’m saying I’m no longer in engineering. That’s it,” he said of the exchange. “And even if I was, when we get hired you have to sign this document, contract, saying you will not reveal anything we divulge during and after employment. So that’s what I implied. It sounded like I was involved before with bitcoin and looked like I’m not involved now. That’s not what I meant. I want to clarify that,” he said. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/07/satoshi-nakamoto-denies-inventing-bitcoin So what about my other points

KindlyBlacksmith

You can just say they are completely clueless on technology. The concept of public key cryptography can be explained in 5 minutes. It is an incredibly basic concept even high schoolers taking AP comp science classes would know.

SatisfactionNo6729

Absolutely. Graduate School I was very lucky to have generous parents pay my tuition outright. I used some of the available student loans to invest in bitcoin. It was not 10k Euro but 6,500 USD. This was late 2016 and I know I ended up purchasing an even 7 BTC. I was very lucky. Overwhelmed by the most rigorous, least lucrative MA program (Sociology/Demography) at UCB; I was distracted. 2017 saw a spring where every day was a spikier spike (again I barely passed AP Econ in high school). Having been raised in the South Silicon Valley w/ its booms and busts…..I was conflicted daily on if I should sell. It was mostly pointless as things stabilized 18-19k during that time. Ultimately I sold 6 of 7 in around the Summer of 2018 for ≈ $16,500. I paid my loan immediately and managed a respectable $90,000 profit. If I had waited another year…much less…2-3 years and weeee. Either way it worked out great for me. I thought my experience was a worthy contribution since I’m in no position to give anyone financial advice. Your idea seems absolutely reasonable to me, as long as you have a 1-2 years or more and a loan that is not flat out fuckery. Good luck!

heartbleed_hack

They don’t but it so much as an AP for ETF exchanges shares for btc or vice versa to reset NAV

Jenn2895

$LINK. Chainlink are positioning themselves to be critical infrastructure. Over 2k partnerships including Univef, DTCC (stock market), Intel, Google, Oracle, IBM, Amazon AWS, Swift (world's largest financial messaging service), AP (Associated Press), Paxos, ANZ, Circle, Kraken, Binance, Bitrue, Mexc, NBA, Hyperledger, Kucoin, etc etc. Deadline for banks to transition to ISO 20022 is Nov 2025. Citi predicts Link will take prominence over BTC. When they flip the switch it's going to be wild! #CHAINLINK

heartbleed_hack

Look at how an ETF works. The price trades at a discount/premium to the NAV. ETF AP (creators/redeemers) can trade shares for the underlying and vice versa. Capital inflows require more buying of the underlying. As well if there is a mismatch from NAV the APs can do one of the actions (selling BTC to etf or buying BTC from ETF) to reset it after close.

StatisticalMan

When you (as joe sixpack) buy shares you are just buying from other investors. Blackrock doesn't rush out to buy Bitcoins because you aren't buying from blackrock. Note this is equally true of all other stocks/etfs. When net-inflows exceed net-outflows though that will cause shares to sell at a slight premium. When that happens "authorized participants" will deliver cash to Blackrock who will buy Bitcoins and issue NEW shares to the AP who will then sell them on the market for a small arbitrage profit. Both sides will you use hedging via future contracts if they want to be hedged against price fluctuations.

RiskyShift

Strictly speaking, they don't directly buy or sell in response to regular customers buying and selling on the secondary market between themselves. They buy/sell BTC when an AP (on its own behalf or on behalf of a market maker) creates/redeems ETF shares with the fund. The secondary market price movement incentivizes creation/redemption by presenting an arbitrage opportunity for APs/MMs.

Lazy-Might-5661

"Decentralizing the btc, more like giving it to the ETF' AP Coinbase.

Who_is_Satoshi

There is something called authorized participants (APs) who are responsible for purchasing the underlying asset (in this case BTC) for the ETFs. The APs are also responsible for creating additional ETF shares *with* the underlying asset they purchased in order to meet ETF share demand to ensure the ETF price tracks the underlying asset. JPMorgan, for example, is one of the AP's for either Blackrock or ARK's ETF. Likely, the APs hold extra BTC on their balance sheet in order to flex one way or another based on ETF trading so they can always make money. Very unlikely that an AP would be caught with their pants down needing to buy BTC en mass from the market in order to maintain ETF - BTC parity. In other words, when someone buys an ETF share, it does not mean that the APs go and buy BTC to reflect the person's ETF share purchase. Only when there is a shortage of shares, causing the ETFs to trade at a slight premium, do APs either use BTC they already hold to create additional ETF shares to align ETF price with BTC price, or purchase new BTC in order to create additional ETF shares to align the ETF price with BTC price. Better to look at general flows on a weekly level to understand the ETFs impact on BTC price. We did an episode on BTC ETFs recently: [https://open.spotify.com/episode/76VvEV2TDRumt7bmdlNAgv?si=6e7cbc77e133461c](https://open.spotify.com/episode/76VvEV2TDRumt7bmdlNAgv?si=6e7cbc77e133461c)

LolWhereAreWe

All those millions in crypto and you could only afford an Omega? Brutal Picked up the AP this year off of bond plays. You’ll get there one day champ.

AmongTheElect

Recently got BCUT as an AI play which is new enough it hasn't had any real jump yet. AP3, Shrapnel and Ridotto. A couple others. And there's three I like yet to be released where I'll probably sell a few current holdings to pick those up.

swordfishde

Not sure where they are getting their info. I’m not the expert. Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think so. My impression was that they needed to go through an authorized participant. So as long as the transaction is being done by the AP it doesn’t need to be “listed”. That’s just the definition of OTC. Adding it to the exchange book to sell right away makes no sense.

DeathScythe676

Let's not forget nepotism. Gary Gensler's former mentor, Glenn Ellison, just happens to be the father of Caroline Ellison. *"The AP reported that Ellison formerly worked with Gary Gensler when the now SEC chairman taught at MIT. As a former economics professor, it's likely that Gensler reported to Ellison, the department's head."* [https://www.businessinsider.com/who-are-caroline-ellisons-parents-alameda-research-fraud-ftx-sbf-2022-12](https://www.businessinsider.com/who-are-caroline-ellisons-parents-alameda-research-fraud-ftx-sbf-2022-12) Caroline Ellison got no jail time.

Perfect_Ability_1190

Hitachi, Australian Payments Plus (AP+), and now Mondelēz International. Whose next?

MachaMacMorrigan

Pretty sure the AP *cannot* be the fund holder.

Arunav88

This is a very positive update for AP+ users.

Perfect_Ability_1190

May Lam, Chief Information Officer at Australian Payments Plus, stated, "With distributed ledgers, payments organizations like AP+ can benefit from increased transparency, enhanced security, and improved efficiency in transaction processing. AP+ has several initiatives underway to ride the wave of innovation with Hedera, unleashing the full potential of Distributed Ledger Technology to transform our organization."

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Australian Payments Plus (AP+), formed by the merger of eftpos, BPAY Group, and NPP Australia, has become a member of the Hedera Governing Council. AP+ is a member-owned organization with over 150 partners and processed 3.9 billion transactions in 2022. It operates in the public interest and includes a diverse range of members from domestic and international banks to merchants and payment service providers in Australia. AP+ is working on initiatives to leverage Distributed Ledger Technology with Hedera to transform its operations. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Bred_Slippy

But he's still happy for JPM to make profits from it from being an AP for BlackRock's spot ETF. Zero consistency or principles.

DamagedHells

It was a civil case, but he was found guilty. There's no clever language involved. https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db#:~:text=NEW%20YORK%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20A,to%20regain%20the%20White%20House.

gabetucker22

I'm far left, but I don't consume mainstream news like NBC or CNN. I understand the dangers of getting information from NBC, so I consume the Economist's podcasts, AP News, video essays and interviews on YouTube, and some of Noam Chomsky/John Oliver/John Stewart's (admittedly politically biased, although rarely dishonest) work. Just because I like Sorkin as a journalist doesn't mean my main news source is NBC!

analogOnly

Isn't JP Morgan the AP on BlackRocks IBIT ETF?

AutoModerator

Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/AP_Abacus/status/1745900387570217036?s=20) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about). --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Objective_Digit

Gensler will fight it apparently. https://x.com/AP_Abacus/status/1745900387570217036?s=20

AutoModerator

Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/AP_Abacus/status/1745900387570217036?s=20) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about). --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Objective_Digit

The CFTC is not the SEC. It certainly won't be approved this year. https://x.com/AP_Abacus/status/1745900387570217036?s=20

StatisticalMan

That is not entirely correct. When you Joe Sixpack buy shares you are just buying from another investor. However without a balancing mechanism demand could push the price of the ETF away from the NAV (value of Bitcoins per share). So authorized participants will deliver cash to create shares as needed on demand. If inflows exceed outflows the ETFs need to issue more shares. The receive cash from AP, create new shares, and buy more Bitcoins. To be clear though ever trade doesn't result in buying more Bitcoins. All that matters is net inflows or net outflows. If there are net inflows then they will issue more shares and buy more Bitcoins. If there are net outflows they will destroy shares and sell the Bitcoins. Last week there was $800M in net inflows which is about 10,000 BTC. It remains to be seen what inflows look like this week. There was no trading yesterday but we should see net inflows updated this evening for today.