Reddit Posts
LOCAL BITCOIN KYC tax information is now dead?
LBRY to challenge SEC’s accusation of securities law violation
NY Attorney General Sues Crypto Exchange CoinEx, Alleges AMP, LBC, LUNA and RLY Tokens Are Securities
NY Attorney General Sues Crypto Exchange CoinEx, Alleges AMP, LBC, LUNA and RLY Tokens Are Securities
LBC Closing; I have a large amount of BTC they won't let me withdraw. What happens to my coins when they shut down?
LocalBitcoins is shutting down, in a major blow to economies like Venezuela
Gensler Says SEC Is Fine Going After Crypto With Its Current Authority
Bitcoin Maximalist's FUD List after FTX implosion
“We lost. Sorry everyone”: The Implications of a District Court Finding Digital Token, LBC, Is a Security | JD Supra
Crypto Protocol LBRY Loses Court Battle With SEC, LBC Token Ruled a Security – Is XRP Next?
How is everyone feeling after the SEC v LBRY ruling?
US Judge has just ruled in the LBRY case that LBC token is a security. SEC has won and LBRY has lost. This is a dark day for US crypto
SEC’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, LBRY loses.... will this now affect most of crypto?
Actual trader on LBC Now moving over to OF 😇🤩😘💝🎁💰🤯🍒🍒🍒come chat link below
Eminem and Snoop Dogg Drop BAYC-Themed Track “From the D 2 the LBC” at ApeFest NYC
In order to reach mass adoption, the tech should be more user friendly. Case study from overseas foreign workers.
When you buy Bitcoin with cash through an exchange, does that get reported to IRS?
List of Today's and Tomorrow's Upcoming Events
Upbit terminates 24 digital assets
LocalBitCoins.com now under investigation for consumer fraud!
LBC (LocalBitCoins.com) FRAUD Investigation has begun!
LocalBitCoins.com under investigation for Fraud
Experiment Week 7: What if you kept buying terrible performing coins?
LBC coin will soon be listed on LBank chinese exchange
I need help with LocalBitcoins. Been with them for several years. Trading 5 BTC~. Has anyone here had Wrongful (account) Termination experience? Any assist/help/advise appreciated.
[HELP] I’ve been on LBC for several years. Trading 5 BTC upwards. Wrongful Termination. No recourse? “Your LocalBitcoins account is terminated”...it must be wrong.. or 1 old minor infraction!
Library LBC and Minds (Minds) blockchain YouTube its already here
Who invested money into LBRY/Odysee coin LBC??
Experiment Week 6: What if you kept buying terrible performing coins?
SEC Files Lawsuit Against Decentralized Blockchain Based Platform LBRY / Odysee, Claimed LBC Illegal.
SEC Charges LBRY, Bittrex Will Delist LBC Pairs Soon!
Cosmos (ATOM) Finally Activates Inter-Blockchain Communication (LBC) Protocol
Free crypto !!!! NO CAPITAL INVESTMENT REQUIRED
Mentions
My girlfriend did that. Paid 3900 penalty. I advised her (after advising myself not to give her financial advice) to maybe think about btc. She knows and understands btc, we traded on LBC back in the day when btc trading was TRULY the wild west. She watched btc go from 263 to 1300 and settle back down to 550-600 per btc. Well, of course she didn't listen to me. She's far too smart for that. If she had done what I suggested, between the two of us, we could have paid off the house we got in 2019. 5 years. Out from under the biggest debt we carry. Boy, I'm so glad she didn't listen to me. Now I can hear the hints being dropped about what I've been doing, and I really dont want to hear it the I took no risk, where's my reward, crap. The "wow, that's working out well. Let me tell you what we should do with it. "
Sad man!! That was where I first bought BTC, if you saw my LBC account you'd think I was a millionaire lol
How are Chinese people buying Bitcoin? Ever since LBC and Pax closed, I can’t trade RMB for BTC.
he probably bought LBC or BNB
What is bisq like? I used to use LBC which was great on the whole but sadly shut down. :(
The SEC destroyed LBC. It's time to destroy the SEC.
LBC Tax after closure? Just a question, anybody who used KYC during LBC operation all those trades under that person's name is usually filed in their database ready for request from the tax man aka IRS or HMRC (if British) Now that local bitcoin is dead....I remember it gave people an option to delete their account. If some one did. Does that now mean any trades during its operation are not recoverable by the tax man? Since technically nobody would be able to answer the request from LBC since no employees and the account information people had a chance to delete just before it shutdown. does that mean any record requested from a tax office is now a dead end? Asking for a friend ofc ofc
tldr; Crypto startup LBRY is set to appeal a New Hampshire court's decision that it violated US securities laws by failing to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC had alleged that LBRY's sale of its native LBRY credits (LBC) violated federal securities laws. The court ruled in favor of the SEC, ordering LBRY to pay a $111,614 penalty and permanently restraining it from participating in violating federal securities laws or any unregistered crypto securities offering. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Ahhh sarcasm… if it’s not then yes there absolutely is regulation on trading crypto p2p in America. So I’m not up on all the rules but you cannot sell crypto for profit if it’s over a certain amount. I think it used to be 10k. I’m not sure if it applies to selling some crypto to a friend or something but we used to do it to make money, buy from and exchange or better yet a dark net vendor at a discount then post a listing on LBC for and sell it for a premium. You could make about 5-10% profit easy. They announced in 15 or 16 that you had to have a money transmitters license (cause money laundering of course and there was a lot of that happening). They gave a short grace period then started arresting people.
tldr; The relevant text of the article is: "Ripple may be holding its breath a bit longer after a United States district court judge refused to rule on if the secondary sale of LBRY Credits (LBC) constitutes a security. On July 11, Judge Paul Barbadoro of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire made the ruling in the case that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought against the decentralized content platform LBRY. The ruling may have offered legal precedent to fellow district court Judge Analisa Torres, who is set to decide on the SEC’s case against Ripple in the coming months." Summary: A US district court judge has refused to rule on whether the secondary sale of LBRY Credits (LBC) constitutes a security, which may have implications for Ripple's ongoing case with the SEC. The ruling in the LBRY case could set a legal precedent for Judge Analisa Torres, who will decide on the SEC's case against Ripple. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
The SEC conceded that secondary sales of LBC weren’t securities, and the judge did as well in a January appeal. Yet, he still refused refused to make a ruling on it. Who decides that now? The SEC?
Wow, the recent ruling on LBRY Credits (LBC) has potential implications for Ripple! The judge didn't make a clear call on whether LBC's secondary sales are securities. This could set a precedent for Ripple's ongoing case. As an XRP holder, I'm eagerly awaiting Judge Analisa Torres' ruling in the coming months. The details will definitely matter, and I hope it's in favor of Ripple. Fingers crossed for a positive outcome!
> Bisq is the new LBC, IMO. I tried it and the issue for me was liquidity. I gave up after not finding anyone with my local fiat currency in my area with any more than $0.20 worth of bitcoin to trade.
Bisq is the new LBC, IMO. But it can't be easily shut down. And now they are decentralizing funding and governance on a DAO using tokenized Bitcoin. It's all really cool, might be the first truly useful/non-scam DAO ever.
Good riddance then. Early LBC was respectable though. Maybe Hodl Hodl now is like early LBC.
Pretty sure LBC closed up shop completely recently.
Localbitcoins.com used to have a cash in person section. I used to meet up with people from there quite often. But then they got rid of it. And now the whole websites gone. Bisq has a cash in person and cash by mail option, but I don't usually see many offers. But that doesn't mean that if you posted one, it wouldn't get filled. I wish all the people who were on LBC would hop on Bisq, they're still out there. The main guy I used to meet up with doubled his fee when he realized I only had a bicycle and that I couldn't really meet up with any other people in the area except him since he lived so close to me. One time, after over a dozen transactions, he asked me to send him my coin before meeting up so he could go sell it to another guy then bring me the cash minus his fee on each end of the transaction. Seemed like he was doing that kinda stuff all day. We always met in a Starbucks, but after a while I felt safe with him and would just get into his car in the parking lot. I'd check the bills with a UV light and an iodine pen. I never actually used the LBC site, I'd just get their phone number off their page and hit them up on signal messenger.
Place an offer on Bisq, see if anyone bites. I see cash offers pop up from time to time. I used to find brokers on localbitcoins and meet them at a Starbucks. But LBC is gone now (and they got rid of the cash option long ago). Aside from face to face cash deals, can also place cash by mail offers on Bisq. Read up on the precautions you should use, there is info about it on the Bisq website. https://bisq.wiki/Cash_by_mail
I agree that only when a foundation or company that is associated mostly with a project sells their token, only then and only then that sale should constitute a security transaction. Secondary sales of the average Joe in a crypto exchange is not a security transaction, because it's completely separate from the original issuer. Users of the network could acquire the token for a variety of reasons, not exclusively for the expectation of profit. Just like we've seen in the LBRY case, where they used LBC as utility token on Odyssey platform.
LBC already lost which is more awful and nobody stood up. LBRY is a legit community project.
If Ripple wins their case, expect LBC (the LBRY) coin to skyrocket because the SeC cases are so similar.
Most cryptocurrencies are not securities as they do not give the holder a stake in an institution or business, nor are they a representation of a debt, nor are they a derivative of an existing security. There may be an argument to be made that stablecoins are securities as they are a token representing a debt, but all coins mentioned in the recent cases don't qualify. Look at the SEC VS LBRY case. It ended with the judge declaring that the investment contracts, created by the IPO and the sales of the LBC token by Library, we're securities, however, the tokens themselves and all sales of them on the secondary market were not. I expect similar rulings from these cases.
I have to admit, I don't know the specifics on why the judge ruled that way, but if I had to take a guess, I would imagine it's because the ICO and institutional sales of the token are seen as direct investments in the business, but the token itself isn't actually affiliated with the business. Owning LBC after buying it on the secondary market doesn't give you ownership in the library company or its assets in the same way a stock or a bond would. That's why the initial sales were considered 'investment contracts' and those contracts were considered securities, not the token itself. The same goes for pretty much all of these projects. Owning ADA, for instance, doesn't give you ownership in IOHK. But this is purely speculation, I'm not a lawyer or versed at all in securities law.
Not necessarily. There's actually legal precedent that this isn't true. Look at the SEC VS. LIBRARY case. In that case they essentially said that the ICO and any sales by library could be considered an 'investment contract' which could be considered a security. However, the LBC token and sales of it on the secondary market were not.
SEC vs. LIBRARY The Judgement categorized the sale of LBC (LIBRARY token) over a 6 year period as an investment contract, however the sale of the LBC token itself on the secondary market could not be considered a security. This has happened before and there is precedent. The SEC has gone on record admitting that the ICO of a project and sales by the founding organization could be potentially considered a security. However, secondary market sales and the token itself could not. There's reason to believe this to be the case for many other crypto projects as well
>The Commission acknowledges LBRY’s representations that it is defunct, ceasing operations, and without the funds to pay a larger fine, and recognizes that a defendant’s ability to pay is a factor when imposing a civil penalty ​ >The SEC won the case in November 2022, the preceding Judge also ruled LBC was a security. It is going to the SEC a LONG time and it is going to cost the US taxpayers a LOT of money if they decide to continue going after cryptos one by one and declaring them securities.
Yup! We've been around since 2017. We're just like the classic LBC experience, no ID verification and maximum privacy/security!
Musicoin and LBC. Both became total losses for me.
Just hit the east side of the LBC On a mission tryna find Mr. Warren G Seen a car full of girls, ain't no need to tweak All you skirts know what's up with 213
Ask the LBC (Large Bitcoin Collider) folks https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
Anyone here use Odysee regularly? How much money (LBC) have you made for watching videos?
Robosats has very few traders in most countries. Tried it from 3 countries were LBC you would always find traders, no one on Robosats
Regulators mount up It was a clear black night, a clear white moon Warren G was on the streets, trying to consume Some skirts for the eve, so I can get some phones Rolling in my ride, chilling all alone [Nate:] Just hit the east side of the LBC On a mission trying to find Mr. Warren G Seen a car full of girls ain't no need to tweak All you skirts know what's up with 213
Ripple labs DID NOT create XRP! Other individual developers created XRP, and Ripple was created afterwards. For the case, it is *VERY* probable that XRP will be classified a non-security in secondary markets, as was LBC.
The SEC won the case against LBRY's LBC token.
Exactly my thought, time help set my friend up selling/buying btc locally there if no one else is yet since LBC shut down. Maybe it’s time to get Dar Es Salaam its first bitcoin ATM.
Yeah, then it starts to get complicated. In general, i can understand the argument why a coin with an ICO is considered a security, but in the LBC case for example, it was decided that only the coins sold during ICO are considered a security, but not those that were bought by normal people on CEXs later. Though i don't understand how they want to differentiate between the 2. I guess that only means that the CEXs that have LBC listed are not to be blamed for selling unregistered securities, but only the entity that sold them during the ICO. But not sure about all this, i could be wrong.
That's bigger than LBC, a security according to the SEC.
Thanks, yes Paxful has seen good growth but even they pivoted to full KYC, much like LBC too. L2s like Optimism or Arbitrum could be a good option for users, mainly because these are very under served in P2P exchanges (afaik no P2P platform exists on L2s), whereas Binance controls the P2P for binance smart chain over their own CEX and has a big monopoly especially in unstable/high inflation countries where people trade in/out of their local fiat currencies to crypto stables. L2s can support ETH and stables too
LBC stated that they shut down for financial reasons and I have no reason not to take them at their word. Russia was a major market for them and they had to close it down after the war started. They've also been bleeding clients to Paxful over the years. No L2 plans as of yet, which L2 solutions specifically are you interested in?
Post shutting down of LBC, some think the heat is gonna drop on P2P exchanges, how does localmonero plan to deal with regulatory pressure? Also any plans to add Eth via L2s? That could create a huge market as L2 fees are low and can facilitate P2P trades easily
72% LTC 22% BTC 3% ETH 2% LBC 1% split between BNB, ETC, HNT I’d say Litecoin is the right coin to add, OP. That’s just my take
This are the two reasons: 1. #Cardano ICO was in Japan, not available to US investors. 2. A judge recently ruled in LBRY case that secondary sales of $LBC tokens were not securities. This sets an important precedent for things like $ADA.
This was useful to me! Thank you LBC. I was able to buy a half a BTC a long while ago, which I spent as rapidly, on the next day or so I think, so no income earned by me except for the fees here and there. That was before the carbon pollution costs of maintaining the network really started to increase, and before I know about POS being low carbon vs POW. May the founders and tech team and supporters find new pursuits, hopefully in ecological areas where conservation practices can be applied to preserve habitats, or maybe, simply to rest doing whatever they like. Also shout out to the traders on there, because any exchange is nothing without supporters and traders to facilitate those exchanges.
LBC Closing; but my account still has a large chunk of money they refuse to let me withdraw? Now that they are closing are they required to release my funds to me? They've been running me in circles for years asking for more and more ridiculous verification; which they always deny for some reason. Now that they are closing are they required to allow me to withdraw my funds, regardless if I verify anything or do anything further they request? They surely cannot just keep/seize my coins, and this is well into lawyer territory with the amount. Has anyone had any luck bypassing this requirement, or has any recommendations outside of just waiting until they shut down and have to release my funds to me? Is there any chance they can keep the funds? Please let me know the best course of action. They seem to be hell-bent on making this impossible for me to simple delete my account and withdraw my funds. I have never traded on, nor used this account for anything but a temporary wallet. All funds are clean, account is clean, etc. There seems to be no issue besides the fact they wont accept any ID I've provided for absolute BS reasons. Anyone able to help point me in the correct direction, or going through anything similar?
the USA Patriot Act killed LBC long ago. they had been running on fumes hoping the act was indeed temporary, like the spooks and tyrants promised as they shoved it down the throats of literally everyone in the world. anyone who believed that should be banned from voting.
Switched to LocalCoinSwap. It actually looks better than LBC
It costs about $1 to KYC someone. LBC charges 1% on all trades 24 hours a day across the world. Unless they have an army of 10,000 moron employees who are overpaid I fail to see how they aren't raking in profits.
Sorry to see it go, but it is not unexpected. A long time ago, I was a major LBC seller in my area and I found it to be an excellent opportunity to help new people get going with Bitcoin. I only did face-to-face cash because that was the best way to avoid being scammed. I had to stop because the U.S. had made it effectively illegal to use the service. There have been many instances in the U.S. of: 1. Users being charged with money laundering. 2. Sellers being charged with failure to register as a money transmitter. 3. Users having their money and coins confiscated through civil forfeiture. Being a major supplier put me in the government's cross-hairs, so I had to quit.
tldr; The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) admitted in the remedies hearing of the LBRY case that secondary sales of its LBC coin were not securities sales. The paper "The Ineluctable Modality of Securities Law: Why Fungible Crypto Assets Are Not Securities" was written by Lewis Cohen, Gregory Strong, Freeman Lewin and Sarah Chen of the DLx Law firm. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*
So how much are fees. I know LBC charge 1% which is £97 straight away. I doubled it to 2% thinking CB fees would be similar.
19562 / 2 (0.5btc) = 9781 (LBC Sale Price) 19129 / 2 (0.5btc) = 9564 (CB buy price) Fees @ 2% (LBC + CB) = 195 (this might be way out. I dunno) Diff between buy & sell = 217 minus fees @ 195 = 22
“The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) admitted on record that the sale of LBRY Credits (LBC) tokens in the secondary market doesn’t constitute a security.“ looking good for XRP.
The problem is that we need this in writing as a decision from the judge. I don't think we will get it, based on the impression i got from Deaton. Only this will give confidence to the exchanges to list LBC and subsequently XRP.
Congrats to any hodlers of LBC im seeing it as an 89% gain in 24 hrs
This is not true at all. The SEC brought an enforcement action against LBRY in March 2021 which they recently won, claiming that LBRY had offered and sold LBC as an unregistered security in violation of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act. The SEC's suit seeks injunctive relief, disgorgement, and civil penalties. Bitcoin is not a shitcoin security, and even Gary Gensler and the SEC have gone on record time and time again saying they do not consider Bitcoin to be a security, but all those shitcoins that had ICOs are obviously securities and could be subject to enforcement actions in the future. It also doesn’t necessarily mean they will be “illegal”, they just need to register as securities now or clean up their shitcoin act and launch like Bitcoin did without “tokenomics” (i.e., fraud) that gives 10% of the token supply to the founders, 10% to the dev team, 20% to the Foundation, 10% to the DAO and 50% sold in ICOs and funding rounds where they swindle the naive shitcoiners.
Meanwhile, check out this extract from another article. What sort of regulator actively avoids clarity?! > However, the SEC has refused to provide clarity regarding LBC secondary market transactions despite LBRY CEO Jeremy Kauffman’s request. > “When asked by @jeremykauffman and “STRONGLY ENCOURAGED” BY THE JUDGE to provide clarity regarding secondary transactions of #LBC, the SEC has refused,” Deaton said. > He noted that the presiding judge of the LBRY v. SEC lawsuit uttered the words “secondary market/ transactions” and “clarity” over a dozen times. However, the SEC argued that the secondary market is not included in the case, adding that it is not its duty to provide clarity. https://thecryptobasic.com/2023/01/23/sensible-crypto-regulation-isnt-coming-soon-deaton-triple-dares-congress-to-prove-him-wrong/
>SEC arbitrarily decides to classify ETH a security It won't be arbitrary and nodes is not really the main argument >Notably, the Court found that, even ignoring such LBRY statements, LBRY’s decision to reserve or “pre-mine” hundreds of millions of coins for itself led purchasers of LBC “to expect that they too would profit from their holdings of LBC as a result of LBRY’s assiduous efforts.” LBRY case has set the precedent that any premined coin is a security even if the company issuing coins promises no updates or roadmap. Being a security just means you just have to register and make proper disclosures and can only trade on securities exchange. Premine, ICO coins are really just silicon valley start ups hiding behind bitcoin and blockchain buzzwords playing an information and regulatory arbitrage game to escape silicon valley regulations. Anyone who is not wise to it cannot be a critical thinking adult. A lot of stuff that's happening in crypto today in cahoots with crypto exchanges, the same shenanigans was happening in bucket shops in the early 20th century which led to the Martin Act of 1921 which outlawed bucket shops and eventually The Securities Act of 1933. Above all, information asymmetry between insiders and outsides was the main reason. This is why LBRY lost their case. What would you do in a financial market where there are no rules and unethical, dishonest behavior has gone from non existent to being the norm today? Who doesn't want to print money for themselves if they could do without requirement of any disclosures and market it to the public as whatever they want?
The sentence would apply to every coin with a premine >Notably, the Court found that, even ignoring such LBRY statements, LBRY’s decision to reserve or “pre-mine” hundreds of millions of coins for itself led purchasers of LBC “to expect that they too would profit from their holdings of LBC as a result of LBRY’s assiduous efforts.” LBRY case has set the precedent that any premined coin is a security even if the company issuing coins promises no updates or roadmap.
Clear as day LBRY case has already set the precedent that any premined coin is a security even if the company issuing coins promises no updates or roadmap. >Notably, the Court found that, even ignoring such LBRY statements, LBRY’s decision to reserve or “pre-mine” hundreds of millions of coins for itself led purchasers of LBC “to expect that they too would profit from their holdings of LBC as a result of LBRY’s assiduous efforts.” Ethereum foundation centrally premined 72 million eth before a single block was mined of which 12 million was supposedly given to founders for free which is clearly a lot of coins already and it's the same as any equity issuance where ownership and management control issuance and distribution but then if you were to look at the actual sale curve, it follows the [mathematical precision of a power function](https://prestonbyrne.com/2018/04/23/on-ethereum-security/) which is only possible if it was almost entirely paid out to a [single entity](https://twitter.com/Leerzeit/status/1591190118492098560) or small group of people working in concert. There's a central issuer company with an executive board of directors which owns [trademarks](https://trademarks.justia.com/866/34/ethereum-86634529.html), licensed AWS central servers, creates roadmaps, locks up funds, has [branding, marketing teams and business plans](https://nitter.net/HODLneverSODL/status/1505891471668482050#m). (1) an investment of money ✔️ (2) in a common enterprise ✔️ (3) with the expectation of profit ✔️ (4) to be derived from the efforts of others ✔️
tldr; The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued Ripple Labs and its two co-founders, Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse, for selling $XRP as an unregistered security in 2013. The SEC also sued LBRY for selling unregistered securities in the form of $LBC tokens. Ripple has 16 organizations that stand behind it against the SEC. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
So many questions in the one question The last one first. There's a Chinese expression, "kill the chicken to frighten the monkey". In the West it has become very common for law enforcement, especially the FBI, to indulge in selective enforcement. Instead of investigating serious crime, the FBI now only targets the low-hanging fruit, and then writes an exaggerated press release claiming that another major money laundering operation has been shut down How do they find out? A Bitcoin seller advertises on Localbitcoins. Each LBC seller has stats. Local FBI agents target the local Bitcoin seller with the biggest stats. A year or two later, they're writing the inevitable press release How does your closed group get prosecuted? By leaking. One member gets some police trouble for something unrelated. The police promise a lesser charge in return for evidence of Bitcoin use in the group A local court officer once told me that when police arrest housebreakers they ask if the thief saw any drugs in the houses they burgled As for the general question: https://www.itworldcanada.com/post/senators-warren-and-marshall-introduce-bill-to-regulate-cryptocurrency In spite of some claims that the proposed Warren bill requires nodes and other innocent parties to register as money services, it seems to fall short of that, and also falls short of the "we just want to use cryptocurrencies" scenario in your post This is consistent with the general increases in regulation for 3 years now - mandatory KYC, travel rule part 1, travel rule part 2 - in which P2P is deliberately left untouched All the above only refers to decentralized cryptocurrencies. Centralized e-money has been attacked by law enforcement and regulators since e-Gold. Having a single point of attack makes a cryptocurrency vulnerable. Ripple, Iota, BSV, all doomed
From your own article: CFTC Chairman Rostin Behnam Thinks Differently The CFTC classifying ETH as a commodity seems to be in direct contrast with what its chairman, Rostin Behnam, thinks. In a recent crypto event at Princeton University, Behnam suggested that only Bitcoin is a commodity, seemingly pivoting from its earlier view that both top cryptocurrencies are commodities. Behnam’s recent comments side him with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman Gary Gensler. The SEC chief has repeatedly said that he believes only Bitcoin is a commodity, implying that ETH is a security. Gensler doubled down on this view after Ethereum implemented a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism a couple of months ago. Gensler has recently been on a mission to prove his point. The SEC won its case against LBRY, a decentralized file-sharing and payment network, in October, proving that the protocol’s LBC token was a security that was issued without first registering it with the agency. It also seems like the SEC will win the year-long case against Ripple (XRP). There is still room for debate but I don’t assume ETH lasting much longer considering how many regulatory representatives are involved. https://www.investing.com/news/cryptocurrency-news/cftc-calls-btc-eth-and-usdt-commodities-in-ftx-court-filing-2964556
From your own article: CFTC Chairman Rostin Behnam Thinks Differently The CFTC classifying ETH as a commodity seems to be in direct contrast with what its chairman, Rostin Behnam, thinks. In a recent crypto event at Princeton University, Behnam suggested that only Bitcoin is a commodity, seemingly pivoting from its earlier view that both top cryptocurrencies are commodities. Behnam’s recent comments side him with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman Gary Gensler. The SEC chief has repeatedly said that he believes only Bitcoin is a commodity, implying that ETH is a security. Gensler doubled down on this view after Ethereum implemented a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism a couple of months ago. Gensler has recently been on a mission to prove his point. The SEC won its case against LBRY, a decentralized file-sharing and payment network, in October, proving that the protocol’s LBC token was a security that was issued without first registering it with the agency. It also seems like the SEC will win the year-long case against Ripple (XRP). There is still room for debate but I don’t assume ETH lasting much longer considering how many regulatory representatives are involved.
Well the collisions are very very unlikely. While there is a "ton" of them, the space is so large, that to hit 1 collision would be amazing lottery win. As of this date there is not known collision for RIPEMD160 at all (not just in this LBC project), nothing at all in the whole history of the universe. Not a single one.
They are in the middle of solving 55, so they are far from 56. But they may get there eventually. Anyway yes, 0x22306e3f1a72 starts with many many zeros. They do start with zero for the puzzle to be solvable, that's the whole point. If someone used fully random (proper, normal) private key, the puzzle would not be solved. That the one is not puzzle is easily explained, as I did previously already, someone experimented, perhaps the author of the puzzle was testing his key generator for the puzzle ... or perhaps some developer was just playing around to learn about how things work internally ... It's still toy example, not a normal secure key. And yes, the least significant bits is what is being explored by LBC project. Of course in theory (say given infinite time), LBC would explore all the bits, but in practice this is not possible (with current knowledge and hardware). And yes, other bits are zero. It's the same as in my example I've given, the second player tries "1" then "2" then "3" and goes up, +1 every time.
This was part of the judgement >Even if LBRY never said a word about it being an investment…by retaining hundreds of millions of LBC for itself, LBRY also signaled that it was motivated to work tirelessly to improve the value of its blockchain for itself and any LBC purchasers…would lead purchasers of LBC to expect that they too would profit from their holdings of LBC as a result of LBRY’s assiduous efforts and this was the interpretation of crypto lawyer Gabriel Shapiro >it's dicta, but here the LBRY judge reasons that even if team is completely silent about efforts--no promises, no contracts--but premines tokens, that alone creates a sufficient expectation of profits from their efforts in common enterprise to pass the Howey test
I'll reply here for all the other messages. Yes, they found keys but those are not randomly generated keys. They are unlikely to find a single normally (securely, i.e. randomly) generated keys. Let me give you example. We create a game, in which one player thinks of a number between 1 and 100,000,000 and the second one will try to guess the number. The second player can make 1 guess per hour. The first player may pick up the number at random, in which case it is unlikely for the second player to guess the first player's number. He can do 24 guesses per day, 8760 guesses per year. Let's say the second player guesses the number by starting from 1 and going +1 each time. If the first player picks the number at random, there is very small chance the number is smaller than 10,000. The chance is 10,000 / 100,000,000 = 0.0001 = 0.01 %. But if the first player does not want to pick it by random, but chooses something like 1984 as his favorite year because of the book, it will take it less than 3 months for the solution to be found. This is the same with the keys that LBC found - those are "puzzles". They are designed to be found. These puzzles are interesting because they can server as "canary in the mine" (https://share.america.gov/english-idiom-canary-coal-mine/). So someone can, instead of using 160 bits of entropy, they can create a series of puzzles, where they only use 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 bits. Then they can announce these puzzles and see what happens over time. If the game is interesting enough (there is big enough price), people will try to win. So as the coins from these addresses are taken, everyone can see what is the currently possible. So over time you will see coins from address with 40 bits of entropy taken, then later 50, then later 60, and maybe in some years maybe even 70 and then 80. This then tells the world "OK, currently, it is feasible to attack up to K bits of entropy because we've seen coins taken from that address ..."
The problem with all the people trying to be pseudo attorneys is not understanding the problem and hoping hopium is good enough. Please read the complaint SEC Charges Ripple and Two Executives with Conducting $1.3 Billion Unregistered Securities Offering FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 2020-338 Washington D.C., Dec. 22, 2020 — The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it has filed an action against Ripple Labs Inc. and two of its executives, who are also significant security holders, alleging that they raised over $1.3 billion through an unregistered, ongoing digital asset securities offering. According to the SEC's complaint, Ripple; Christian Larsen, the company's co-founder, executive chairman of its board, and former CEO; and Bradley Garlinghouse, the company's current CEO, raised capital to finance the company's business. The complaint alleges that Ripple raised funds, beginning in 2013, through the sale of digital assets known as XRP in an unregistered securities offering to investors in the U.S. and worldwide. Ripple also allegedly distributed billions of XRP in exchange for non-cash consideration, such as labor and market-making services. According to the complaint, in addition to structuring and promoting the XRP sales used to finance the company's business, Larsen and Garlinghouse also effected personal unregistered sales of XRP totaling approximately $600 million. The complaint alleges that the defendants failed to register their offers and sales of XRP or satisfy any exemption from registration, in violation of the registration provisions of the federal securities laws. "Issuers seeking the benefits of a public offering, including access to retail investors, broad distribution and a secondary trading market, must comply with the federal securities laws that require registration of offerings unless an exemption from registration applies," said Stephanie Avakian, Director of the SEC's Enforcement Division. "We allege that Ripple, Larsen, and Garlinghouse failed to register their ongoing offer and sale of billions of XRP to retail investors, which deprived potential purchasers of adequate disclosures about XRP and Ripple's business and other important long-standing protections that are fundamental to our robust public market system." "The registration requirements are designed to ensure that potential investors – including, importantly, retail investors – receive important information about an issuer's business operations and financial condition," said Marc P. Berger, Deputy Director of the SEC's Enforcement Division. "Here, we allege that Ripple and its executives failed over a period of years to satisfy these core investor protection provisions, and as a result investors lacked information to which they were entitled." Tell me how much of this did not happen. How much of this is wrong? How can you mount a defense without understanding the charges? Now the meetings won't matter at all because all you have is the opinion of Hinman in a speech which won't matter because they are not necessarily the opinion of the SEC. And you are deluding yourself into thinking this a thing. Now look at the library accusations The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged LBRY, a blockchain company, with conducting an unregistered offering of digital asset securities. According to the SEC's complaint, from at least July 2016 to February 2021, LBRY, which offers a video sharing application, sold digital asset securities called "LBRY Credits" to numerous investors, including investors based in the US. The complaint alleges that LBRY did not file a registration statement for the offering, and that the offering failed to satisfy any exemption from registration. The complaint further alleges that by failing to file a registration statement, LBRY denied prospective investors the information required for such an offering to the public. As alleged, LBRY received more than $11 million in U.S. dollars, Bitcoin, and services from purchasers who participated in its offering. Dont get lost in the sauce now. What you need to see is what the charges are. And what actually sticks. According to the ruling document, the SEC was able to convince the court that LBRY completed an unregistered securities offering by selling its LBC crypto. It does so by labeling LBC a security under the conditions of the Howey Test, a precedent set in a 1946 court case for evaluating whether something is a security. This is what should keep you awake at night. Forget the shit ripple is telling you. The thing is can the sec convince the judge analisa torres that ripple is a security? Well the SEC convinced Judge Paul Barbadoro. The SEC will press Judge Analisa Torres if she even wobbles. You say different court circuit. Good luck with that defense. A murder is a murder in any court circuit. If there is a violation it doesnt matter what level the judge presides over. You have a case based on hopium but not law. Im not an attorney. My opinion is not the one that matters. But my question is why do you think Judge Analisa Torres gives a damn about any of Ripple s arguments? And why do you think that Judge Analisa Torres is gonna dismiss the opinion of Judge Paul Barbadoro and side with Ripple ? These are the questions ripple holders need to ask themselves before they get blindsided with a case they want to believe is so simple.
I am a bitcoin maximalist and I am writing a list to clear my mind in the depth of FTX implosion. there are several imminent(2 months) implosion candidates(bitcoin price bomb) that I am worried about . 1)Mt Gox coins I read some reddit posts and checked mt gox website. My take is that this will probably not come out before early 2023. so not very imminent. 2)USDT/Tether did some google research, read some reports on its website. This hong kong based company had a troubled history, but some of the issues got settled recently. Biggest risk for this company is the high-risk lending. I don't see any sign that an imminent implosion is coming. Maybe it takes longer to implode. 3)Crypto.com This one I'm not sure about. Not much information that I knew of. 4) FTX Hacker dumping ETH I don't see much impact on ETH price. And I don't believe it will impact bitcoin price as much even if it indeed happens. 5) Coinbase record low stock price, ceo selling large volume shares, sister company of troubled genesis, not willing to provide reserver proof for sister company of grayscale, business model relying on high fees - unsustainable, low barriers against incoming competitors, low growth expectation, etc. But, I don't see the sign of imminent implosion. 6) DCG/Grayscale/GBTC/Genesis/Gemini GBTC won't implode because - profitable on fees(2% of 10B annually, which eliminates mother company DCG's intent) assets held by coinbase(based in US, strict stock law) no redemption available(this is critical and time limitation before unlocking helps too) But the thing that got me worried about GBTC is that its mother company DCG has an appetite of inter-company loan. It looks messy and shady. Did Grayscale lend its assets? nobody knows. Genesis Global Capital provides service only to institutions. Genesis lends money to 3 Arrows, Alamede, Gemini, Circle, even its mother company DCG. So that those companies can play risky bets or prolong their high-earning ponzis. By lending, Genesis itself is probably playing high-earning games which leads to current insolvency. Genesis lent out 2.8B in total, 1.8B to its mother company DCG alone. Genesis lost 1.2B in Luna/3 Arrows implosion. DCG paid back 1.1B to rescue in last few months. Genesis lost 0.175B in FTX implosion. DCG paid back 0.14B to rescue it again in last week. So DCG still owes its sibling Genesis about 0.575B. Genesis says that it needs 1B to avoid bankruptcy. Binance said no. Apollo maybe not answered yet or No. Its mother DCG apparently is not capable of rescuing this time - DCG itself is facing scrutiny and financial strains. And I believe DCG will not risk itself and its golden son GBTC to rescue Genesis. I don't believe any smart institution dares to throw their hard-earned into this fire. Genesis also just hired Moelis, a invest bank specializing in restructuring and bankruptcy. I check Moelis's website - in a similiar 2.4B case of Dex Media, on May 02 2016 media reported, on May 16 2016 bankruptcy announced, and on end of July finalized. Genesis said in an investor meeting last week that it will announce update this week. So I'll keep an eye on it - I believe Genesis will announce bankruptcy. How will it impact bitcoin price? not sure, my guess is under 15000, maybe as low as 14200. When will it happen? very likely this week, but maybe later if they play some dirty tricks. 7) Microstrategy borrowed 2.75B, annual interest 2.01%, out of which 1.6B will be due in March 2025 and 2027. holding 130K BTC, average cost of 30700, worth of 2.08B at current price 16K. Its most recent borrowing is 0.205B from Silvergate Capital in March 2022. It has to pay back in 3 years. This debt had collateral of 19.5K(double the debt value) BTC then. Now the collateral is 25.6K BTC. Saylor said if price drops to 3562, the collateral will be 117K BTC. Even though the debt is higher than holding, it might not implode immediately. Hope it could survive this winter. Also the company microstrategy is performing badly, stock price is going lower. concerning. 8）Paul Graham/Orange DAO/Vitalik Buterin tweeter exchange. Just some attention hungry celebrities releasing fud. No fact bases. 9）Senate hearing of FTX Dec 1 2022, not sure how this will play out. 10)a District Court Finding Digital Token, LBC, Is a Security. I think this might be a good thing in long term and not a too bad thing as time of being.
Where does the SEC fit into this. I saw they had some meetings setup with the FTX execs back in March. Is it likely there were some payoffs? How could a company this large, committing massive fraud not be on their radar? Timing with the LBC verdict also feels sus.
My ignorant guesses on why LBRY: - LBRY was mainly pitching a speculative value proposition for its digital token, LBC - Limited utility to the tokens when they were sold (only three videos were available on the blockchain, each produced by LBRY itself) - No convincing evidence that purchasers bought without profit expectation - Business model that depends probably entirely on the value of LBC for profit (doesn't seem to have any other revenue sources) . Wonder how Ripple compare against LBRY in these points.
To be fair LBC has existed for 10 years and SEC just now got done with them. All these are 4 or 5 years old or even less.
# Fuck So here is the things to note. 1. LBRY needs to appeal this. I have no faith in US gov. Even less in US legal system. But, it might be possible to get this overruled. 2. If you hold it, you're in the USA, you aren't an accredited investor, and don't want to risk things. You have to just hold it until you are an accredited investor or this gets overruled somehow. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ The likely this will get overruled with the right judge is high. Like the judge reasoning is they were holding LBC. By that logic, diamonds, video games, etc are securities. Artificial scarcity is actually pretty common. Like there is stories of book developers buying the majority of the books to make it a number 1 on list, and then just holding it. Would that make books securities? ​ The sad thing is, it would legit likely take congress to actually fix this.
It's annoying that the SEC can say "unregistered security" and "you're hurting investors" when it is the investors that are hurt by a ruling in the SEC's favor because that particular crypto will nosedive, like LBC today.
This was honesty going to happen 100% with the amount of garbage ICO’s that occur. Reading the comments, none of us know what LBC or LBRY was at all.
No! You’re supposed to inverse this sub. Technically you should be buying LBC right now
[LBC Token](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/library-credits/)? Wtf is this garbage lmao, top800 crypto by marketcap
Am I the only one who sees this kind of as a win? LBC is being labeled a security because they’re trying to promise move value to a dead token while still holding the majority of the tokens. This should incentivize future blockchains to not horde all of something they create with the sole goal of increasing its value
Ah, I still remember my buddy moving 1 BTC into LBC and trying to talk me into it. Cool concept, but I’ll keep the BTC
>even if team is completely silent about efforts--no promises, no contracts--but premines tokens, that alone creates a sufficient expectation of profits from their efforts in common enterprise to pass the Howey test This is really damning verdict. Lot of teams didn't just premine and sell coins. They're actively in control of protocol, promising updates and stuff. ​ >Even if LBRY never said a word about it being an investment…by retaining hundreds of millions of LBC for itself, LBRY also signaled that it was motivated to work tirelessly to improve the value of its blockchain for itself and any LBC purchasers…would lead purchasers of LBC to expect that they too would profit from their holdings of LBC as a result of LBRY’s assiduous efforts.” So if the team keeps coins for itself from premine, that itself is a signal of intent to buyers that they too would profit from the work of the team's efforts.
I encourage everyone to read the Order. “The LBRY Network was designed to eventually have a circulation of approximately 1 billion LBC… Most of the LBC will be released in the future to compensate miners, but when the LBRY Blockchain launched in June 2016, LBRY reserved a “pre-mine” of 400 million LBC for itself.” “… It sold more than 9.8 million LBC to the public directly through LBRY applications and another 44.1 million LBC through various digital asset trading platforms…And it used more than 142 million LBC to incentivize users, software developers, and software testers, as well as compensate employees and contractors.” “[LBRY’s Twitter] post: “1.2B Market Cap and We Don’t Care.” … At that point, only three videos were available on the blockchain, each produced by LBRY itself.” “ In August 2016, the COO of LBRY, Josh Finer, emailed a potential investor explaining that the company was “currently negotiating private placements of LBC with several [other] investors” and asked the recipient to write him back “if there is interest” so the two could “chat”… The “opportunity is obvious,” wrote the COO, “buy a bunch of credits, put them away safely, and hope that in 1-3 years we’ve appreciated even 10% of how much Bitcoin has in the past few years.” Id. He wraps up by pitching LBRY’s commitment to building its Network: “[i]f our product has the utility we plan, the credits should appreciate accordingly.” Note: LBC is now worth about a penny, with a market cap of 8.8M. I had never heard of it, but it appears to be a pre-mined, speculative shitcoin, with tokenomics grossly skewed in favor of the founders and investors, who dumped their bags on retail and never delivered anything close to a usable product. I have omitted the Court’s legal analysis, though encourage you to read to see the framework and tests surrounding securities. But on the facts alone, should we be upset with this decision? Do we want to give these shitcoins a regulatory stamp of approval? And I’m not even saying the answer is no…
Never heard of LBC but hopefully this doesn't repeat with xrp
The SEC charged LBRY, claiming the their native LBC token is an unregistered security back in back in 2021. LBRY is a digital marketplace controlled by the market's participants. It’s to be the most open, fair, and efficient marketplace in the near future. I found this as an example: **Ernest wants to release his comedy-horror film, Ernie Runs For President. The content is encrypted and sliced into many pieces. These pieces are stored by hosts.** **Hillary issues a payment to Ernest for the decryption key, allowing her to watch the film. Hillary's LBRY client collects the pieces from the hosts and reassembles them, using the key to decrypt the pieces (if necessary). This is transparent to Hillary, the film streams within a few seconds after purchase.**
I just noticed something on the LBC homepage. It says like this: “The "Large Bitcoin Collider" (LBC - a homage to LHC) is a distributed effort to find at least one collision of private Bitcoin keys by creating addresses to private keys in a continuous 2^160 range. These are checked against the list of known BTC addresses with funds on them. In the rare event of a collision, the funds on the address in question would become accessible to the collision finder.” So the amount of private keys is increased after they started this? Is it possible to increase it even further? Maybe all this wallets they found was predates this change and now it might be not possible? (Or am I just wishful thinking?)
Sure. But again, to find the keys to any particular address would be basically impossible. And there is at least some question of whether the addresses found by the LBC used low entropy.
Yes, I mostly use Bisq and Robosats but I've used LBC and Paxful no problems. Just stick to high reputation peers to avoid disputes. I've never personally encountered a bad peer on LBC or Paxful. Paxful also has Lightning support so you can transfer small amounts for next to no cost. I left LBC when they made KYC mandatory and stick to Bisq now as much as possible. LBC and Paxful are really not that complicated. You can send them bitcoin directly to their LBC or Paxful wallet and they P2P trade it for fiat straight to their bank.
$LBC, not because anything significant has happened or will. But because I kinda want to get rid of it.
I hope Odysee wins the lawsuit so i can get rid of this $LBC lmao
$LBC still doing a bunch of nothing.
You earn LBC from viewing. You can also boost a creator's content with LBC and tip with it. It honestly has way better ideas and implementation than anything else and is also censorship resistant, which is probably a factor in why the SEC took them to court. I had to scroll way too far down to see Odysee mentioned.
It tells you it's a collision finder. Mining does not do that. So what LBC does isn't mining.
How does the LBC withdrawal fee of currently around 0.0002 BTC (~4$) affect these people?
LBC fees to withdraw are super high, currently around 0.0002BTC for every withdrawal, which is around 4$. How does this work with such a low income?
tldr; Eminem and Snoop Dogg presented their single "From the D 2 The LBC" through a Metaverse-inspired animated video instead of an actual live act at the MTV Video Music Awards. It was a world-premiere performance with a twist and the first time that NFTs were part of the coveted video music award show. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
tldr; American rappers Eminem and Snoop Dogg will perform their mutual single “From D 2 the LBC” live on the MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs) this Sunday. Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) holders will be allowed to watch this event live at the “Otherside” Metaverse. The song includes the artists’ personal non-fungible tokens, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
tldr; Snoop Dogg and Eminem will perform their song “From the D to the LBC’s” Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFTs at the VMAs this Sunday. The rappers will perform from inside Yuga Labs’ upcoming metaverse game “Otherside,” which is currently in “Phase 1” of development. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
I really don't count LBC as an exchange because it's all p2p, would be like saying my buddy is an exchange because I bought some BTC off him, there's no order book or spread, but I guess one could argue it is, not really worth bothering though. Point is of the actual exchanges, only Bitstamp was even operational during that time period and it had bad ux. I went there before quadriga and abandoned it very quickly, night and day ui different. The "other options" were either bad or shut down at that time, both cavertex and VOS closed doors in 2015, so you were stuck shucking coins p2p (may as well use reddit) quadriga or Bitstamp basically.
I’ve read it. Got interested in BTC and bought my first coin on LBC for $20.