- Joined
- Sep 19, 2018
- Messages
- 8,243
- Location
- Gulf Coast, USA
- Joined SLU
- 02-22-2008
- SLU Posts
- 16791
The best part of this commercial, is when she "explains it" to her husband, its just silence. Because its literally buying nothing.Are you in?
EPILOGUE: The company that was advertised in this commercial was just seized and all of its customers' funds (that actually still exist) are being liquidated because it falsely overreported its actual assets by like a factor of two.
HAHA wow, you're right, I didn't catch that XDThe best part of this commercial, is when she "explains it" to her husband, its just silence. Because its literally buying nothing.
bUT tHeY owN THe iMAgEsBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA
tl;dr: CryptoBro: "Don't harsh ma buzz, dude."This is where the culty aspect of the crypto/NFT space really comes back to bite its participants. Because continued growth depends on the people who own and sell the tokens being totally and unwaveringly confident in their value, there's heavy social pressure not do or say anything that could weaken that confidence - like discussing negative crypto news; even acknowledging basic risks - which would be considered due diligence when investing in ANYTHING else - is off-limits. So you get things like Coachella selling lifetime passes on the blockchain that are now completely inaccessible to the people who paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for them because "what if the second-largest cryptocurrency exchange collapses and vanishes overnight, because after all that is a real thing that has actually happened before" is literally forbidden heretical thought.
It really feels like of you are going to be selling lifetime passes, you should also be hosting the data yourself.This is where the culty aspect of the crypto/NFT space really comes back to bite its participants. Because continued growth depends on the people who own and sell the tokens being totally and unwaveringly confident in their value, there's heavy social pressure not do or say anything that could weaken that confidence - like discussing negative crypto news; even acknowledging basic risks - which would be considered due diligence when investing in ANYTHING else - is off-limits. So you get things like Coachella selling lifetime passes on the blockchain that are now completely inaccessible to the people who paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for them because "what if the second-largest cryptocurrency exchange collapses and vanishes overnight, because after all that is a real thing that has actually happened before" is literally forbidden heretical thought.
The Securities and Exchange Commission was seeking information from collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX earlier this year, the Prospect has confirmed, bringing a new perspective to an effort by a bipartisan group of congressmembers to slow down that investigation.
The March letter from eight House members—four Democrats and four Republicans—questioned the SEC’s authority to make informal inquiries to crypto and blockchain companies, and intimated that the requests violated federal law.
Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN), whom the Republican caucus just elected as majority whip, the number three position in the House GOP leadership, led the letter. In a contemporaneous Twitter thread, Emmer wrote: “My office has received numerous tips from crypto and blockchain firms that SEC Chair @GaryGensler’s information reporting ‘requests’ to the crypto community are overburdensome, don’t feel particularly … voluntary … and are stifling innovation.”
A case of the eggs policing the hen house.We now know that FTX was one of those firms receiving information requests from the SEC, about the very activities that have brought down the firm. This raises the question of whether Emmer and the other congressmembers were acting on behalf of FTX (which has been credibly accused of snatching customer money to make risky bets) to try to chill an ongoing investigation from an independent regulatory and law enforcement agency.
I've never heard that one before.A case of the eggs policing the hen house.
The most famous early examples of Sugar Babies were royal mistresses. These women were financially supported (often with a yearly allowance) by Kings. However, they were also often smart about it. They used the money and connections to secure a future for themselves rather than buying frivolous things.
These included Diane de Poitiers. She was the chief mistress of King Henry II in the early 1500s. She went on to become an influential member of the French court. In the 1600s, Nell Gwyn was kept by King Charles II of England and Scotland. She represented the classic Cinderella story of a poor actress becoming wealthy and powerful. In the 1700s, Madame de Pompadour was the official mistress of Louis XV. She went on to become a powerful member of the court and secured noble titles for herself and her family.
Don't think of eggs as babies (in how I meant them here). Rather as ineffectual. Immobile. Easily cracked.The Congress critters were the babies of cryptocurrency exchanges?