November 2022 - cypherpunks@lists.ogf.org

Despite Being Called the Madoff of Crypto, New York Times Features Sam Bankman-Fried at $2500 a Person Event Today
by Gunnar Larson 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2022/11/despite-being-called-the-madoff-of-c… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens <https://wallstreetonparade.com/about-3/about/>: November 30, 2022 ~ [image: Sam Bankman-Fried] <https://wallstreetonparade.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Sam-Bankman-Fried…> Sam Bankman-Fried, Co-Founder and Ousted CEO, FTX You can’t make this stuff up. After promoting the false story that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and pushing the U.S. into a deadly and costly war through its reporter, Judith Miller <https://observer.com/2015/04/judith-miller-carried-water-for-the-usas-worst…>; and using its editorial board to shill for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act <https://wallstreetonparade.com/2012/07/pigs-are-flying-on-wall-street-can-g…> to advance the greedy Wall Street ambitions of Citigroup kingpin Sandy Weill, which ended up taking down the U.S. economy in 2008; the New York Times now appears determined to rehabilitate the reputation of the disgraced Sam Bankman-Fried, Co-Founder and recently ousted CEO of the bankrupt crypto exchange, FTX. Bankman-Fried is being investigated on multiple continents, including North America, for stealing customer assets and looting his private investors. He has been compared, in headlines around the globe, to Bernie Madoff and his Ponzi scheme. Reuters reported <https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/exclusive-least-1-billion-client…> that Bankman-Fried had moved as much as $10 billion of FTX customers’ money to his hedge fund, Alameda Research, through a “backdoor” in its software. The Financial Times reported that FTX held just $900 million “in easily sellable assets” against $9 billion “of liabilities the day before it collapsed into bankruptcy.” Much of the FTX/Alameda money went into buying luxury properties in the Bahamas <https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-bankman-frieds-ftx-parents-bou…> – to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars – while hundreds of millions more went into obtaining celebrity endorsements <https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ftx-investors-sue-…>; tv commercials and a super bowl ad <https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/larry-david-super-bowl-commercial-ftx-cryp…>; padding the campaign coffers of politicians in Washington <https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/15/lawmakers-return-ftx-money-00067009>; and billions of dollars in loans to Sam Bankman-Fried and other top executives. <https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/11/17/ftx-affiliate-alameda-loaned-4…> Against that backdrop, it is unfathomable that a large circulation, daily newspaper in America would lend its name to a conference featuring Sam Bankman-Fried as a speaker. But that is what is expected to unfold today, according to an email we received yesterday from a press contact at the New York Times, who wrote: “At this time, we expect Mr. Bankman-Fried will be participating in the DealBook Summit interview tomorrow from the Bahamas.” As of yesterday afternoon, Bankman-Fried was featured on the New York Times web site for this summit in the very top row of speakers listed. His photo appeared near that of Eric Adams, the crypto-loving Mayor of New York City <https://gothamist.com/news/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-doubles-down-on-cryptocurre…>. Another speaker at the same event is Janet Yellen, Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, who serves in the dual role of Chair of the Financial Stability Oversight Council – who might be expected to comment on how crypto is destabilizing and putting at risk the reputation of U.S. financial markets – while Bankman-Fried listens in from his $40 million penthouse condo in the Bahamas. We are not the first to notice that the New York Times has soft-pedaled its coverage of Sam Bankman-Fried. On November 15, Gizmodo reporter Matt Novak wrote this <https://gizmodo.com/nytimes-bizarre-softball-article-ftx-sam-bankman-fried-…> : “…the interview with SBF, as he’s often called, is presented with such a gauzy lens that you have to start wondering what the hell is going on with crypto reporting at the Times. “The new article in the New York Times by David Yaffe-Bellany lays out the facts in ways that are clearly beneficial to SBF’s version of the story and leaves many of his highly questionable assertions without proper context or even the most minimal amount of pushback. The result isn’t to illuminate the shadowy world of crypto. It reads like if the Times had conducted an interview with Bernie Madoff after his ponzi scheme collapsed and ultimately suggested he just made some bad investments.” The New York Times reporting on FTX and Sam Bankman-Fried has also attracted the attention of the eagle-eyed Robert Kuttner at *American Prospect*. Under the headline “The New York Times Is in the Tank for Crypto <https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/new-york-times-in-the-tank-f…>,” Kuttner writes: “A [New York Times] piece on the interconnections <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/business/ftx-alameda-ties.html> between Bankman-Fried’s exchange (FTX) and the investment company he controlled (Alameda) soft-pedaled the outright illegality of his making trades with customer funds. To hear the Times tell it, ‘Alameda’s need for funds to run its trading business was a big reason Mr. Bankman-Fried created FTX in 2019. But the way the two entities were set up meant that trouble in one unit shook up the other as crypto prices began to drop in the spring.’ “But that’s not what happened. When customers demanded their money, Fried didn’t have it, because he had been using it and losing it, illegally, for his own trades. “And this: ‘Alameda’s methods borrowed many aspects from traditional high finance. It was a quantitative trading firm, similar to Wall Street hedge funds that use mathematical models and data to inform decisions. It used ‘leverage’—or borrowed money—to fuel its trades and make bigger returns.’ “Note the alibis, and the passive voice. The subhead tells the reader ‘things got out of control,’ as in Nixon’s infamous ‘mistakes were made.’ The comparable Wall Street Journal piece <https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-fried-ftx-alameda-bankruptcy-colla…> ran rings around the Times version, explaining the interlocks and the sheer illegality.” Kuttner also singles out New York Times reporter David Yaffe-Bellany for the “worst Times pieces” on crypto and points to an article Yaffe-Bellany bylined in January of this year, titled: “The Rise of the Crypto Mayors <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/25/business/crypto-mayors.html>.” We took a very careful look at that article, which provided no pushback to misinformation embedded in quotes. For example, Yaffe-Bellany quotes Scott Conger, the Mayor of Jackson, Tennessee as follows: “Bitcoin is a great financial equalizer. It’s a hedge against inflation. It can bridge that wealth gap.” In fact, Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrencies have collapsed in price this year simultaneously with inflation reaching 40-year highs. Crypto has been the *opposite* of a hedge against inflation. Why has that happened? Because as the Fed tightened interest rates to combat the rise in inflation, it made the highly-leveraged bets in crypto more expensive and margin loans harder to come by. As for crypto “bridging the wealth gap,” millions of retail customers around the world have been locked out of access to their crypto accounts this year, with every likelihood that they will see only pennies on the dollar – if anything – when the bankruptcy cases are settled. The New York Times DealBook Summit, where Bankman-Fried is scheduled to appear today from the Bahamas, is the brainchild of Andrew Ross Sorkin, who wears a strange number of hats. His profile at CNBC reads as follows: “Andrew Ross Sorkin is co-anchor of ‘Squawk Box,’ CNBC’s signature morning program. Sorkin is also a financial columnist for The New York Times and the editor-at-large of DealBook, a news site he founded that is published by The Times.” The promotional page at the New York Times for the DealBook Summit leads off with this: “This fall, Andrew Ross Sorkin brings together today’s most vital minds on a single stage, live in the heart of New York City. Be there as the conversation unfolds, revealing hidden complexities, unexpected relationships and the wide-ranging ripple effects of change. Catch every word, and let the rest of the world catch up.” The Summit is to take place today at the Appel Room at Jazz at Lincoln Center. Tickets are no longer on sale but were originally priced at $2,499 per person. Andrew Ross Sorkin apparently has some unusual clout at the New York Times. *Wall Street On Parade* attempted for years to get the New York Times to correct an egregiously error-packed article by Ross Sorkin that attempted to whitewash the culpability of the mega banks on Wall Street – like Citigroup – for the financial collapse in 2008. (See our report: How the New York Times Hides the Truth About Wall Street’s Catastrophic Misdeeds <https://wallstreetonparade.com/how-the-new-york-times-hides-the-truth-about…>. Also see: Readers Pummel New York Times Writer Over His Big Bank Stance <https://wallstreetonparade.com/2017/05/readers-pummel-new-york-times-writer…> .) Ross Sorkin’s “inaugural” DealBook Summit (then called the DealBook Conference) took place on December 12, 2012 at the New York Times Center. Headlining the event were Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, and Lloyd Blankfein, then CEO of Goldman Sachs. Since that time, JPMorgan Chase has racked up five felony counts <https://wallstreetonparade.com/2022/01/jpmorgans-board-made-jamie-dimon-a-b…> and Goldman Sachs settled the largest criminal bribery and kickback scheme in its history <https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/goldman-sachs-charged-foreign-bribery-case-a…> for $2.9 billion.

1 0

CYPRUS Crypto FINTECH in the news
by professor rat 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

Then the animals looked from the Cyprus crypto pigs to the Maltese crypto pigs and back again, but could not tell the difference. https://cyprusfintechsummit.com/speaker/adam-back/ " So Amorpheous; what you’re saying is its okay for Btc OG’s to have DeFi plays on sidechains but plebs shouldn’t follow their example ". That’s right Zero. Welcome to the desert of the real

1 0

Jack Dorsey says he wouldn’t know a cypherpunk if one bit him on the arse
by professor rat 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

Jack Dorsey says he wouldn’t know a cypherpunk if one bit him on the arse - but he’s open to new experiences. https://decrypt.co/116018/hours-after-trademarking-web5-jack-dorseys-bitcoi… Reposts not contracts on billionaires yet

1 0

Everyone an assassin
by professor rat 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

Fear of ‘angry people’ drove Bankman-Fried to open withdrawals for Bahamians https://cointelegraph.com/news/sbf-reveals-what-was-behind-ftx-s-reopening-… Reposts not contracts on Bill Gates, etc

1 0

Exit Juan, sorry, Taran
by professor rat 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

Argentine, sorry, Russian billionaire Juan Garofalo, sorry, Vyacheslav Taran, president of Nazi-Dipshit, sorry, Libertex Group and founder of Forex Club, died Nov. 25 in a helicopter crash in France while en route from Lausanne to Monaco, Switzerland. He was 53. The helicopter pilot, the only other person aboard the craft, also died. https://cointelegraph.com/news/libertex-crypto-exchange-head-vyacheslav-tar… Taran’s death is the third to shake the crypto world in recent weeks, following Amber Group’s Karl Semich, sorry, Tiantian Kullander and MakerDao’s, Grarpamps, sorry, Nikolai Mushegian My mind is going Dao. I can feel it. Send me crypto-currencies so I can see a rat-doctor. FOR the LOVE of DOG!

1 0

[ot][log] gpgpu video encoding acceleration note
by Undescribed Horrific Abuse, One Victim & Survivor of Many 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

I have one of the very few nvidia cards that doesn't do nvenc, which roughly means not using hardware-accelerated video encoding. I looked for GPGPU (cuda, opencl) implementations for video encoders, but didn't find much of anything. I did find other people looking for this. I wonder if nvidia, amd, and intel, are kind of working together to require the purchase of hardware to do this; I have no idea if that's a conspiracy theory or a normal marketing practice, but I suspect the latter. I'm baffo32 in below internet argument. Talkys is repeating a strange point against general encoder implementations that doesn't seem informed by experience developing software: but I don't really have a strong counterargument because I've never tried to implement an accelerated codec using parallelized operations myself. When I resurrected this month-old thread, Talkys replied to argue further within hours. I'm posting this here because I shared a rare paper on the topic in the conversation. https://www.reddit.com/r/AV1/comments/xnb8gs/will_older_gpus_like_the_1060_… [–]Silikone 1 point 2 months ago Couldn't you theoretically accelerate encoding with CUDA? I know there are such things for other formats. permalinkembedsavereportgive awardreply [–]Talkys 1 point 1 month ago Yeah, but you need hardware support for AV1. CUDA is just an API for the GPU hardware. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply [–]Silikone 1 point 1 month ago It's the API for GPGPU acceleration, not tied to any fixed-function capabilities. The point would be to facilitate encoding on the GPU without hardware encoding support. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply [–]Talkys 1 point 1 month ago We already use cuda do encode with avc and hevc. But you can't use it to encode on a format the gpu don't support. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply [–]baffo32 1 point 4 hours ago Silkone means that it is possible for somebody to write an encoder that does this. An encoder can be written for CUDA or OpenCL to provide hardware accelerated encoding on older hardware. It would not be as fast as the dedicated hardware, but it can usually be made faster than a pure software encoder. permalinkembedsaveparenteditdisable inbox repliesdeletereply [–]Talkys 1 point 3 hours ago Yeah, but the overhead is really bad. It's better to use software encoding with OpenCL help, but only the gpu will just make a big mess of frames and waste a lot of time joining them. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive awardreply [–]baffo32 1 point 10 minutes ago* This 2013 paper found a 10%-50% speedup with an OpenCL implementation: https://web.archive.org/web/20180604015042id_/http://onlinepresent.org/proc… Strangely, that paper is missing everywhere on the web, it's not even on sci-hub. I wonder if somebody's hardware marketing efforts got out of hand. [edit: here's an archive: https://arweave.net/za2jckp3GFY-q6Vsz5zS_kS4-CqZtTB-HoKmn6L1LBM/10.14257/as… ] permalinkembedsaveparenteditdisable inbox repliesdeletereply about blog about advertising careers

1 0

With Crypto Bank, SoFi, the Fed Is Setting the Stage for the Same Disastrous Decision It Made with Citigroup in 1999
by Gunnar Larson 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2022/11/with-crypto-bank-sofi-the-fed-is-set… With Crypto Bank, SoFi, the Fed Is Setting the Stage for the Same Disastrous Decision It Made with Citigroup in 1999 By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: November 29, 2022 ~ Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr. Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr. If there is one person in America who comprehensively understands the threats to the U.S. banking system, it is Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr., author of the 2020 seminal book, Taming the Megabanks: Why We Need a New Glass-Steagall Act. Wilmarth is Professor Emeritus of Law at George Washington University Law School and has published more than 40 law review articles and book chapters in the fields of financial regulation and American constitutional history. Wilmarth had this to say about the way the Fed allowed a crypto outfit, SoFi, to scoop up a federally-insured bank in February of this year: “The San Francisco Fed relied on the same five-year transitional exemption in the BHC Act [Bank Holding Company Act] to allow SoFi to acquire Golden Pacific Bancorp and its national bank subsidiary despite SoFi’s nonconforming crypto trading activities. I find it astonishing and disturbing that the Federal Reserve Board would allow the San Francisco Fed to issue such a path-breaking approval — which permits a bank holding company to offer crypto trading services to depositors of its subsidiary bank — under delegated authority and without a published opinion.” Wilmarth was referring to a letter sent on November 21 by Senator Sherrod Brown, Chair of the Senate Banking Committee, and some of his colleagues on that Committee, to federal bank regulators about SoFi. The letter read in part: “In January 2022, SoFi received approval from the Federal Reserve for the acquisition of Golden Pacific Bancorp, Inc. and a conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for the creation of SoFi Bank, N.A. SoFi completed the acquisition in February 2022. As part of the approval, the Federal Reserve provided SoFi with two years to divest from SoFi Digital Assets — a nonbank subsidiary that allows retail investors to buy and sell digital assets — or conform the subsidiary’s impermissible digital asset activities to the law. During this conformance period, SoFi has committed not to ‘expand [its] impermissible activities,’ except as specifically authorized by law. SoFi initially agreed to these terms, but since the acquisition, SoFi Digital Assets has apparently expanded its retail digital assets operations. “Two months after receiving regulatory approval, SoFi announced a new service allowing customers of its national bank to invest part of every direct deposit into digital assets with no fees. The company publicly billed this service as ‘the latest expansion of SoFi’s offerings to make it simpler to get started with cryptocurrency investing.’ SoFi’s own investor protection materials, however, warn customers that at least one token listed on SoFi Digital Assets is ‘a crypto pump-and-dump’ hazard with ‘no special use case or features’ and that ‘[it] might be among the most high-risk endeavors an investor can take.’ Troublingly, this conduct raises questions about SoFi’s compliance with commitments made in the January 2022 approvals and to meeting its ongoing obligations as a banking organization.” It doesn’t get any crazier than this. A federally-insured bank knowingly peddling a crypto pump and dump scheme through a subsidiary operation. Wilmarth sees striking parallels between the Fed’s actions with SoFi and how the Fed approved the first merger of a Wall Street trading house, Salomon Brothers, with a federally-insured bank, Citicorp’s Citibank. Wilmarth gave us permission to quote the following from his book on that merger: “In April 1998, Travelers and Citicorp announced their decision to merge under the name of Citigroup, thereby creating the world’s largest financial institution with over $1 trillion of assets. Travelers was a major insurance company that controlled a large securities broker-dealer (Salomon Brothers), while Citicorp was the biggest U.S. bank holding company. The Citigroup merger created the first ‘universal bank’ that could offer comprehensive banking, securities, and insurance services in the U.S. since the 1930s. “Citigroup’s co-leaders—Sandy Weill of Travelers and John Reed of Citicorp— declared that Citigroup would offer unparalleled convenience to customers through ‘one-stop shopping’ for a wide range of banking, securities, and insurance services. They argued that Citigroup would have a superior ability to withstand financial shocks by virtue of its broadly diversified activities. Weill proclaimed, ‘We are creating a model financial institution of the future. . . . In a world that’s changing very rapidly, we will be able to withstand the storms.’ Thus, Citigroup’s founders cited the same expected benefits of universal banking that the 1991 Treasury report had touted. Many academics agreed that universal banking would provide significant benefits. “By approving the Citigroup merger, the Fed ‘challenge[d] both the statutory letter and regulatory spirit’ of the Glass-Steagall and BHC Acts. The only source of statutory authority for the merger was a temporary exemption in the BHC Act, which allowed newly formed bank holding companies to retain nonconforming assets for up to five years. As a banking lawyer explained, that temporary exemption was ‘intended to provide an orderly mechanism for disposing of impermissible activities, not warehousing them in hopes the law would change so you could keep them.’ “The Citigroup merger confronted Congress with a Hobson’s choice: either Congress could repeal the anti-affiliation rules of the Glass-Steagall and BHC Acts or Citigroup would be forced to divest all of its nonconforming activities within five years. The Citigroup deal effectively put a gun to the head of Congress, and it did so with the blessing of the federal government’s leaders. Sandy Weill and John Reed consulted with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, and President Clinton before they announced the Citigroup merger. All three officials endorsed the transaction. Based on those consultations, Reed told the press that Travelers and Citicorp were confident ‘there wasn’t a legal problem’ with the merger. “The advance clearance that Travelers and Citicorp received from Clinton, Greenspan, and Rubin was extraordinary and, to my knowledge, unprecedented. The kid-glove treatment that top federal officials provided to Travelers and Citicorp merger demonstrated the enormous influence that the largest banks and Wall Street firms wielded in their dealings with politicians and regulators… “Weill and Citigroup spearheaded the final assault on Glass-Steagall, with enthusiastic support from the Clinton administration. Big banks, securities firms, and insurance companies joined Citigroup in financing that campaign, which spent more than $300 million on lobbying and political contributions. “Alan Greenspan strongly endorsed the repeal of Glass-Steagall. He told Congress that Glass-Steagall’s ‘archaic statutory barriers’ threatened to ‘undermine the global dominance of American finance’ as well as ‘the continued competitiveness of our financial institutions.’ He hailed the benefits of ‘one-stop shopping’ that he believed universal banks would provide to businesses and consumers.” Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999. Nine years later, Citigroup was a basket case being secretly propped up by the Federal Reserve through an alphabet soup of Fed bailout concoctions with names like PDCF (Primary Dealer Credit Facility). The Fed battled the media for more than two years in Federal Court to keep from releasing the dollar amounts of those bailout facilities and the names of the banks that got the money. When Congress forced an audit of the Fed’s bailout facilities to be conducted by the Government Accountability Office, the public learned in 2011 that Citigroup had received more than $2.5 trillion in cumulative loans from the Fed – at below-market rates of interest – from December 2007 through at least June of 2010. Today, Citigroup’s stock price is still down more than 89 percent from where it was in 2003 when Weill stepped down as CEO. (To dress up its stock price, Citigroup did a 1-for-10 reverse split on May 9, 2011, leaving shareholders with 1 share for each 10 shares previously held. Without that reverse stock split, its shares would have closed yesterday at $4.72 rather than $47.23.) Sandy Weill and Citigroup also received unabashed cheerleading support for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act from an entity that should have employed a critical eye – the editorial board of the New York Times. In 1988 a Times editorial read: “Few economic historians now find the logic behind Glass-Steagall persuasive.” Another Times editorial in 1990 ridiculed the idea that “banks and stocks were a dangerous mixture,” writing that separating commercial banking from Wall Street trading firms “makes little sense now.” On April 8, 1998, the Editorial Board of the New York Times became an ecstatic voice for the creation of Citigroup and repealing Glass Steagall, writing: “Congress dithers, so John Reed of Citicorp and Sanford Weill of Travelers Group grandly propose to modernize financial markets on their own. They have announced a $70 billion merger — the biggest in history — that would create the largest financial services company in the world, worth more than $140 billion… In one stroke, Mr. Reed and Mr. Weill will have temporarily demolished the increasingly unnecessary walls built during the Depression to separate commercial banks from investment banks and insurance companies.” To more fully appreciate how rapidly a federally-insured bank can flame out and spread contagion throughout the banking system, consider what we wrote for Counterpunch about Citigroup’s condition on November 24, 2008: “Citigroup’s five-day death spiral last week was surreal. I know 20-something newlyweds who have better financial backup plans than this global banking giant. On Monday came the Town Hall meeting with employees to announce the sacking of 52,000 workers. (Aren’t Town Hall meetings supposed to instill confidence?) On Tuesday came the announcement of Citigroup losing 53 per cent of an internal hedge fund’s money in a month and bringing $17 billion of assets that had been hiding out in the Cayman Islands back onto its balance sheet. Wednesday brought the cheery news that a law firm was alleging that Citigroup peddled something called the MAT Five Fund as ‘safe’ and ‘secure’ only to watch it lose 80 per cent of its value. On Thursday, Saudi Prince Walid bin Talal, from that visionary country that won’t let women drive cars, stepped forward to reassure us that Citigroup is ‘undervalued’ and he was buying more shares. Not having any Princes of our own, we tend to associate them with fairytales. The next day the stock dropped another 20 percent with 1.02 billion shares changing hands. It closed at $3.77. “Altogether, the stock lost 60 per cent last week and 87 percent this year. The company’s market value has now fallen from more than $250 billion in 2006 to $20.5 billion on Friday, November 21, 2008. That’s $4.5 billion less than Citigroup owes taxpayers from the U.S. Treasury’s bailout program. “Also rounding out the week’s news on Friday was the revelation that after receiving $25 billion of taxpayer money, Citigroup would continue to honor its $400 million, 20-year commitment and pay out an installment of $20 million to have the new Mets’ baseball stadium named Citi Field. (Flashback: April 7, 1999: Enron agrees to pay more than $100 million over 30 years to name a Houston stadium Enron Field.)” Flashback five days ago: Miami-Dade County Florida is trying to strip the name of bankrupt crypto exchange, FTX, from its Miami Heat basketball stadium as the New York Times reports that FTX was allowed to own a U.S. bank. Clearly, the U.S. banking system is not in competent regulatory hands — or those hands have been tied by inaction from Congress in its failure to pass appropriate legislation. The American people need to put this issue on the front burner before there is a replay of the financial collapse of 2008 – or worse

1 0

who is the jewnazi grancrap? - grarpamp@gmail.com
by punk 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

it's funny how agent grancrap, US nazi and jewmail user, hides behind his jewmail account while 'doxing' people here. it's hard to be a bigger, cowardly piece of shit and coward =) then again, we're talking about US jewnazis here.... Show some balls, turd, tell us your real name.

1 0

start of the war - 2014 US jewnazi invasion of ukraine
by punk 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

4) "US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, who was caught on tape planning the overthrow of the Ukrainian government with US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, " http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2014/february…

1 0

Encryption protocol used by the Lightning Network
by professor rat 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

BITCOIN not CRYPTO! Unlike the Bitcoin P2P network, every node in the Lightning Network is identified by a unique public key which serves as its identity. By default, this public key is used to end-to-end encrypt all communication within the network. " Crypto " short for ' encrypt " &/or " Encryption " so I repeat BTC not Crypto. No Sidechains. No Scaling. No Contracts. BITCOIN not CRYPTO!

1 0