2,088 sats stacked
stacking since: #7838
There cannot be any surprise at this one, nor at the targeted wording in the judgement for the wider 'crypto' scene; love em or hate em, the SEC has been clear about what they understood Bitcoin to be (commodity) and what they understood 'crypto' to be (securities).
Thanks for the clarification.
"Boilerplate" or not, could you expand on why you added the clauses into the license that provide your company with the right to monetize content provided by users?
To me, and I suspect many others, it's the antithesis of what I understood you were trying to do with impervious, and as the licensing verbiage stands, appears to align with the type of behaviour we've seen and experienced from large listed tech companies that monetize their users.. which is what we're all totally OVER.
If it's just a case of throwing in boilerplate (time and cost) with light review, then it's an easy fix to revise right?
Stuff me roughly - I'd not seen those - they look excellent! Thanks :-)
Thanks for the info on Standard Sats - I did not know about this :-)
Your point about "custodians will need to hedge their market risk" highlights an important distinction - Fedimint isn't pegging back to fiat currency values - the chaumian ecash from a Fedimint (let's call them f-sats) are interoperable with the Lightning Network and are just another form of sats - albeit with a different set of trade-offs to both L2 (Lightning) and L1 (onchain). What the USD/GBP/JPY/AUD do against BTC is irrelevant.
The Standard Sats capability of hedging could be pretty useful in some economies where the holders literally cannot financially tolerate the current volatility of BTC. Is that hedging automated or manually managed by the Uncle Jim?
The shared problem of multiple custodians in either approach is a harder one at this early stage of Bitcoin - but great to see new options arriving to be explored!
Me too! Got to use Peach at HoneyBadger up in Riga on the weekend - same impressions - still some polish to be added but the core functionality of being able to buy peer to peer is there.
Importantly, because Peach is based in Switzerland, you can buy up to CHF1,000/day without KYC .. and because Switzerland is connected in to the European SEPA rails, this opens that P2P buying/trading to the whole of the EU.
I loved how they were able to deploy a bespoke "PAYMENT" option specifically for the conference which was "Cash at BHB" - worked a treat for me.
This chad move highlights the absolute debacle that the clownfest over at OFAC actually is - no-one should have the right to block transactions at all - but in the current world they currently do: This is why censorship resistance and all it's many composite factors are so important.
Dropping TC into every major ETH wallet certainly highlights that .. expensive tuition
This is perfectly valid approach and usually ensures your business stays under your full control.. and generally, small. Get cash flow positive in a sweet niche you enjoy and there's a lot of happiness and stress-free existence that flows from that.
However, when your ideas and market and goals are MUCH bigger, it's better to travel in a group - more ideas, more connections, and more existing wheels to re-use rather than re-inventing/re-discovering everything alone.
Raising capital can be a smart thing to do, but you want smart money not dumb money. Smart money brings expertise, ideas and connections. Dumb money sits quietly and offers no additional input/value. Both have their place but don't confuse the two.
Hard won perspectives.
Congratulations @k00b on the raise - that shit is a lot of hard yards.
There's a few factors that determine how to approach this:
  1. Are sats KYC'd or no-KYC?
  2. Do you need your solicitors involved?
  3. Do your beneficiaries understand Bitcoin?
The first feeds into a choice of mechanics; multi-sigs, passphrases, sharding, collaborative, custodial etc etc. It is also related to the last - do your beneficiaries understand Bitcoin and even what KYC/No-KYC means and implies?
The second probably mostly applies for those with KYC sats and who are older with other assets and families. Disputes post-death, bring lawyers and the courts into the conversation. In some jurisdictions, the flow of assets from the estate to the beneficiaries must pass through the executor's hands. In my experience:
  1. Lawyers are generally unencumbered by technical ability, and for professional risk management reasons, will be unlikely to be prepared to do so. So they will be as informed about key management as the founder of Creggcoin is - that is to say - clueless.
  2. Deaths in the family bring out both the best and the worst in people. YOU may be clear about what you want(ed) to happen, but those around you may see things differently, AND be prepared to raise legal cases/disputes etc. In the first, lawyers become part of the problem - that's ok just cater for it. In the second, lawyers can become part of the solution.. or not. Just be aware that it's a possibility.
The third is probably the least discussed amoungst bitcoiners imo. Do your beneficiaries understand Bitcoin? Do they at least understand what they are getting? Have you discussed that with them and what they may/may not do? Do you realise that once you're gone, all that goes out the window. Again, entirely personal set of circumstances for each individual thinking about this.
The one actionable piece of advice you should consider in the immediate term:
Whilst you think about those other points - make sure your family/loved ones have the contacts for someone you trust who will help them when the time comes.
Deaths of those you're close to are a massive shock to the system - huge stress and distress - memory, cognitive function, decision making .. all goes out the window for a while. Ensuring those left have a trusted friend to reach out to gives them a safe set of hands you trust.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesss! Upgrading to c-Lightning atm and keen to dig into all of these :-)
Thanks for all your work!