Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Bitcoin discussion and news

You don't worry about billions of lines of code that governs your life. Nor do you care about who has your data. In cryptopia, you've got self custody not only of your money, but all of your data too.
Because the bank is regulated, if they fuck up my transaction, they will have to make it good. If I have been impoverished as a result, they will have to compensate me. If the problem is widespread enough, they will be fined. So far, the FCA alone have levied £40m of fines this year, and nothing of note has even really happened. This all happens without me (as the customer) having to raise a finger.

Banks also have to meet operational resilience regulation, which, amongst many other things, requires them to have identified how they ensure customers do not have a material loss of coverage no matter what happens. If they can’t show this, they will lose the licence to conduct financial business.

Meeting regulation is difficult and costly and without the power of the regulator, it wouldn’t happen. It’s there to protect you and it’s so successful that, as the customer, you don’t even notice it is there. Without it, though, you would very quickly find that you had serious problems and there would be nothing you could do about it.
 
The thing is that like most people I've had my money in banks more or less my whole life and I've never had any issues. A couple of times I've had dodgy transactions on my cards and they've sorted it out and refunded the money. The same goes for everyone I know and anecdotally I haven't heard of friends of friends being ripped off and the news isn't full of stories of banks defrauding people. That's the case regardless of any theoretical risk and I don't need any trust in the motives of the banks for it to be so. Contrast that to crypto where there are obviously scams left right and centre and I'm still not convinced there's anyone involved at all who isn't some sort of scammer tbh.

And I'm just not interested in the sort of demented individualism that says 'you can control your own risk' if the upshot is that the risk is higher. In theory I could control the risk of pilot negligence by flying my own plane when I travel but it's obvious why that's a bad idea isn't it.
 
What makes an organisation "for profit" ?

DAOs are democratic if they allow voting.

Right now a small board at the FCA has the power to ban financial products and by God they have, without any kind of vote in parliament, without anyone of us getting a say.

Now if you want to change that through lobbying parliament, no chance.

In my utopia, the FCA would be just another DAO and there would be other DAOs that can get rid of it and replace if it gets out of line.

I don’t think you have any knowledge or experience of how the FCA actually works. It’s not perfect by any means, but your description there is one you’ve made up for yourself, and then decided to rail against (and is totally wrong).
 
I know a lot of people that work in financial regulation. Mostly, I know them because I have been on the other side of the table to them, and they’ve been making my life very difficult. I am very grateful to them for this. To a man and woman, they take their role very seriously, and are doing it (for less pay than they would get on the other side) because they believe in it. There are many different types of committee dealing with every type of product and risk, and, always, they think from the consumer’s perspective. They are there to make sure people can just take the stability of the whole system and their smooth experience for granted. And that’s what people do. Sure, the reason it is set up is because a stable financial system benefits capital. But the individuals working there devote their working lives to making sure that this stability exists. And you want to replace this army of people with what? An anonymous quango of mysterious motivation? No thanks.
 
And I'm just not interested in the sort of demented individualism that says 'you can control your own risk' if the upshot is that the risk is higher. In theory I could control the risk of pilot negligence by flying my own plane when I travel but it's obvious why that's a bad idea isn't it.
It always comes back to “me me me” with these twats. Their life, their wants, their rules, I know best, I can do what I want etc. A total disconnect from social obligations and society, but that’s OK because freedom.
 
blockchain based decentralised air traffic control system
Not available yet, but its coming.
 
Not available yet, but its coming.
It's proposed by these people as a thing to do. Doesn't mean it's coming.

Also the figures on aviation growth the paper's forecast of a looming crisis is based on come from 2019. Do you think those forecasts have aged well?

Blockchain Tech. Providing solutions to problems that don't exist since 2010. :cool:
 
I know a lot of people that work in financial regulation. Mostly, I know them because I have been on the other side of the table to them, and they’ve been making my life very difficult. I am very grateful to them for this. To a man and woman, they take their role very seriously, and are doing it (for less pay than they would get on the other side) because they believe in it. There are many different types of committee dealing with every type of product and risk, and, always, they think from the consumer’s perspective. They are there to make sure people can just take the stability of the whole system and their smooth experience for granted. And that’s what people do. Sure, the reason it is set up is because a stable financial system benefits capital. But the individuals working there devote their working lives to making sure that this stability exists. And you want to replace this army of people with what? An anonymous quango of mysterious motivation? No thanks.

Oh what heros!

Did we get to vote them in? I think you'll find that we didn't. Can we the people remove them? Is there an alternative to them?

Let's take the example of cryptocurrencies. For them to ban cryptocurrency derivatives, there is an argument for that. It's a valid position to hold because they can (and have) claimed that they want to protect people from leverage. That's fair enough. But they went way further than that. They banned every UK company in the land from offering and using any cryptocurrency product, including ETNs and ETFs. - with the exception of buying and selling physical crypto in which case the company has to be registered as a crytocurrency service provider with the FCA.

The latter part, registering with the FCA, I don't have a problem with, because if the FCA is to introduce good, fair crypto leglisation then that's the way to go. However, I doubt very much they will do that, because of a dracion ban on companies offering ETNs and ETFs, on mere speculation that the market is somehow manipulated (When all fucking markets are), is a sick joke.

That crowd have cost me a lot of money and I can think of no single danger greater than the FCA when it comes to my wealth.

The Chairman of the FCA as a private individual went and told anyone who would listen, including the media that he expects many SIPP pension providers to go bust over the coming years, because "they offer high risk instruments such as cryptocurrency products." - Hold on though, no one is allowed to buy any new ETNs or ETFs relating to crypto. Which means he's reffering to people still holding on their crypto ETNs and ETFs.

He is giving a wink wink nudge nudge to persuade SIPP pension providers to force the sale of their clients crypto assets. You can bet that if that were to be done, it would be at a time when the markets are down, with the usual fat pigs in the boys clubs picking up the assets on the cheap. Then when people complain to him, he can say he made an innocent prediction and it's a matter between pension firms and their clients, keeping his paws clean.

The regulators exist for one reason. Maintain the status quo. And the status quo is that the rich buy cheap and the fucking plebs are the bag holders that make the rich richer buy buying the shite that the rich got in early on.

The rich didn't get into crypto early so makes them fucking sick to the stomach that normal ordinary people who got in first would become "comfortable".

So instead, like all other markets, it's about getting those assets off the plebs and into the hands of the rich.

It's the same with land and property.

The plebs have too many houses, they will be regulated out of those houses, so that Blackrock and Blackstone will become the landlords.

Don't fucking sit there and tell me the regulators have the interests of normal people at heart they don't. They keep the order, they keep the status quo, the rich rich and the poor porr., that's what "financial stability" is all about. Pack it in kabbes, stop taking us for weak minded idiots with your patronising shite.
 
The state has no business getting involved in telling people what is an isn't a good investment.

But we are where we are ... so fuck them, we'll just do what we want because we can. Because over the years, the state, does what it does, not because it cares about the people it's supposed to serve, but because it can. Fine.

We, can do, what the fuck, we want.
 
Another plus for cars, is that they enrage sanctimonious virtual signalling tick-box nutters who masquarade as cuddly freedom loving socialists, when in reality they're closet fascist pigs who are desperate to the maintain the status quo, down to their sneering hatred of regular working class folk.
This little tirade tells far more about you, than it tells about anyone else. 'Another plus for cars' ffs.
The state has no business getting involved in telling people what is an isn't a good investment.
You don't actually know what a regulator does, do you?
But we are where we are ... so fuck them, we'll just do what we want because we can. Because over the years, the state, does what it does, not because it cares about the people it's supposed to serve, but because it can. Fine.
Your 'state' is a phantom and your analysis is non existent. Just 'state bad freedom good', it's a joke.
We, can do, what the fuck, we want.
Like petulant children (go on, accuse me of ageism lol)
 
I don’t think you have any knowledge or experience of how the FCA actually works. It’s not perfect by any means, but your description there is one you’ve made up for yourself, and then decided to rail against (and is totally wrong).
They have an executive board and a handful of committees. Still a small number of people under the direction of the Treasury. So everything can change and there is no vote before parliament unless it's to change the structure.

If you think I'm wrong, please tell me how so. Thanks.
 
You don't actually know what a regulator does, do you?
I'm painfully aware of what they do.

And what they do, isn't listed on their website as what they say they do.

If they did nothing, I'd be a lot happier.

Regardless of anyone's opinion, they will be replaced with a much better financial system, by the people, because we can and no amount of whinging from you will change that.
 
…and there we have it. Got there in the end.


Also, hahahahahaha.
But I'll still get there in the end.

And you'll be happy, I'll still be very comfortable if everything stayed the price that is now.

But it's not just about me.

If you can't see how vindictive and nasty the FCA is, then fine.

I'm tolerant of both systems, but many aren't.

As I said, don't whinge about prp crypto people doing what we want. Because when the shoe is on the other foot, it's a case of regulators and banks doing what they want regardless of what anyone else thinks.

So no, Im losing my tolerance, I couldn't give a fuck who wants to keep the old financial system, you're getting something else and you can suck it up.
 
Last edited:
Because the bank is regulated, if they fuck up my transaction, they will have to make it good. If I have been impoverished as a result, they will have to compensate me. If the problem is widespread enough, they will be fined. So far, the FCA alone have levied £40m of fines this year, and nothing of note has even really happened. This all happens without me (as the customer) having to raise a finger.

Yeah I suppose £85k will go a long way after they've lost the rest of my money. :rolleyes: - No thanks, I'd rather be able to actually insure myself properly for a small amount of money. I've tried, but I can't get insurance in the conventional finace world that I could get in the DeFi world. There's no choice because they are corrupt lazy bastards. If it wasn't for crypto, banks would not have bothered with their "Open Banking" project.

Banks are corrupt lazy bastards who keep the lions share of profits, in DeFi the users get back most of the profits and it shows in the yields.

As for £40 mil of fines, that's fuck all, nothing compared to the amount of money that various players have ripped off from their customers.

Banks also have to meet operational resilience regulation, which, amongst many other things, requires them to have identified how they ensure customers do not have a material loss of coverage no matter what happens. If they can’t show this, they will lose the licence to conduct financial business.

I'll settle for audited and insured code thanks, because as I said before, £85k isn't enough when someone has lost way more than that.

Meeting regulation is difficult and costly and without the power of the regulator, it wouldn’t happen. It’s there to protect you and it’s so successful that, as the customer, you don’t even notice it is there. Without it, though, you would very quickly find that you had serious problems and there would be nothing you could do about it.
There's serious problems anyway and there is something I can do about it, go crypto and tell them to fuck off.
 
Yeah I suppose £85k will go a long way after they've lost the rest of my money. :rolleyes: - No thanks, I'd rather be able to actually insure myself properly for a small amount of money. I've tried, but I can't get insurance in the conventional finace world that I could get in the DeFi world. There's no choice because they are corrupt lazy bastards. If it wasn't for crypto, banks would not have bothered with their "Open Banking" project.

Banks are corrupt lazy bastards who keep the lions share of profits, in DeFi the users get back most of the profits and it shows in the yields.

As for £40 mil of fines, that's fuck all, nothing compared to the amount of money that various players have ripped off from their customers.



I'll settle for audited and insured code thanks, because as I said before, £85k isn't enough when someone has lost way more than that.


There's serious problems anyway and there is something I can do about it, go crypto and tell them to fuck off.

If one of the main benefits you are attributing here is the ability better to protect people who have more than £85k in cash lying around I think any claims this isn’t just for the rich fall away in tatters, no?
 
The thing is that like most people I've had my money in banks more or less my whole life and I've never had any issues. A couple of times I've had dodgy transactions on my cards and they've sorted it out and refunded the money. The same goes for everyone I know and anecdotally I haven't heard of friends of friends being ripped off and the news isn't full of stories of banks defrauding people. That's the case regardless of any theoretical risk and I don't need any trust in the motives of the banks for it to be so. Contrast that to crypto where there are obviously scams left right and centre and I'm still not convinced there's anyone involved at all who isn't some sort of scammer tbh.
There's no scams in crypto because scams are illegal! /s

Regulators don't stop naughty people from being naughty! If the "right" naughty people get caught, they are fined fuck all in relation to the money they scammed.

Most of the scams could easily be stopped but regulators are more concerned about the big succesful crypto entities that have lots of money.

Scammers don't have much money to pay the fines but sucessful projects do ... and succesful projects are a threat to "financial stability" !!!!!

As for "I'm still not convinced there's anyone involved at all who isn't some sort of scammer tbh.", yeah do these EEA MEMBERS - Enterprise Ethereum Alliance look like scammers to you?

You'd rather be disembowled by a rusty fork than read 3 paragraphs from a crypto related site, you know fuck all about crypto other than you're shit scared of it because the thought to working class folk being empowerd to make better for themselves without reliance on the state, sickens you to the stomach.

Nothing worse than a working class oik who doesn't know his place eh?
 
Last edited:
If one of the main benefits you are attributing here is the ability better to protect people who have more than £85k in cash lying around I think any claims this isn’t just for the rich fall away in tatters, no?
Everyone can be protected. Anyway, conventional system doesn't protect all of the "rich", if by your standard of rich is anyone with over "£85k".

Some people believe that you need to have 9 figures to be rich and over 2 million to be comfortable ... and no I'm not one of them.
 
That crowd have cost me a lot of money
Surely you fully informed yourself of the risks of investing in products that were awaiting regulatory approval?

I'm shocked that you thought that the FCA, staunch defender of the status quo and hater of the threat crypto poses to it would approve such a product, and that you would invest in something that required that approval to be profitable.

Still you chose to take that risk, and like anything in crypto it's entirely on you to ensure it's sound.

But you blame the FCA for your own shortcomings, you got to judge your own risk, it didn't work out.

Also you fail to see the irony in investing in a product that needs regulation to gain value whilst at the same time seeking to reject regulation of it.

Also just fyi, it's £85k per FCA registered bank so if you are rich enough to have more than £85k you can split it amongst different institutions to guarantee it all. I'm not sure how many different places you could put money but I'm confident you'd need more than a million before you couldn't protect it.

And given that everyone has insurance from the FCA, why would anyone want to buy private insurance and why would any company offer it?
 
Surely you fully informed yourself of the risks of investing in products that were awaiting regulatory approval?

I'm shocked that you thought that the FCA, staunch defender of the status quo and hater of the threat crypto poses to it would approve such a product, and that you would invest in something that required that approval to be profitable.

Still you chose to take that risk, and like anything in crypto it's entirely on you to ensure it's sound.

But you blame the FCA for your own shortcomings, you got to judge your own risk, it didn't work out.
I still made the right decision. I made a lot of money. :)

I won't say how much, because that would be crass.

It's just that they cost me a lot of money as well.
 
I still made the right decision. I made a lot of money. :)

I won't say how much, because that would be crass.

It's just that they cost me a lot of money as well.

Did you produce anything of value to make that money (including the provision of value-producing services in return for it if appropriate)? Because if not you didn’t ‘make’ it, you just took it off other people.
 
Did you produce anything of value to make that money (including the provision of value-producing services in return for it if appropriate)? Because if not you didn’t ‘make’ it, you just took it off other people.

Please keep your rants about the unemployed people on the dole to yourself.

Edit to add : Seriously though, if buying low selling high is such a sin, you'd shut down the Bureau De Change? Ebay? You know what trading is, right? It sure as hell isn't buy high, sell low.
 
Last edited:
The regulation isn’t there so that you get refunded £85k if the bank fails. It’s there to stop the bank failing in the first place.
A solution to a problem that doesn't need to exist.

Banks are wall to wall full of middlemen that aren't needed.

Anything a bank can do, smart contracts can do way better. Why should I mess around with a bank when I can earn more money of a protocol that has access to liquidity pools?

I honestly feel much safer doing that.
 
Back
Top Bottom