US citizens don’t need to fear any Russian disinformation video campaign, just themselves. Remember Pizzagate? No video was needed for this one to stick.

And how on earth did you arrive to this arbitrary conclusion?

The brothers created 16 Ethereum validators and targeted three specific traders who operated MEV bots, the indictment said.

To activate 1 validator you need 32 ETH. So for the 16 validators they got, it would be 512 ETH. Prices in December 2022 for eth were around 1200$. So they “invested” in this fraud over 600,000$.

Today’s eth price is around 3000$ so they’d be having over 1.5 mil, if they weren’t that greedy

deleted by creator

No paywall

I guess some anti-booing tech will be deployed this year as well.

I wouldn’t hold my breath. For mtgox it took a decade like to start doing so. Centralized finance sucks by default.

Ok, I’ll try to explain then.

There is no crypto without a blockchain, and blockchains live on the internet. Btw the projects that are worth in this environment are decentralized.

Federal courts in the US are passing laws and these laws are valid only in the US. They don’t threaten the survival of the “crypto industry” cause they live on the internet, not in the US. It just makes it harder to create a legit project in the US, or if you are a user you will need a VPN to access some sites that are not available in the country you live in.

This is why there is binance.com (for almost everywhere, except US) and binance.us (only for the US). This article fails to mention this difference so claiming that:

The cryptocurrency industry is counting on the federal courts to survive

makes it clear to me that the author has no understanding of how crypto works. That’s my good faith take on this article.

The cryptocurrency industry is counting on the federal courts to survive a sweeping enforcement crusade by Wall Street’s top regulator.

This statement can only mean that the author does not understand how blockchains work.

Intersectionality as a concept started by Crenshaw. She noticed a court case where a black woman sued a factory for not giving her a secretary job du to racism. The judge said that it could not be due to racism since the factory had employees that were black, and dismissed the case or ruled against it. Crenshaw spotted that the judge had not taken into consideration that all black employees were male working in the production line and all the secretary positions were taken by white females, so the judicial system can be ineffective when people are found in the intersection of different inequalities/etc, which by themselves are addressed. Or supposed to be addressed, but that’s another topic.

For the case in the article I think this is an analysis tool that could help us understand both sides. Of course with more info than the ones provided here.

Hope this was clear enough?

I don’t trust the judicial system to handle systemic racism. Also, I can’t say I fully understand this case. Intersectionality is a great analysis tool to use in situations like this, no matter what the outcome of the trial will be.

If two people agree to a debate, but one of them participates in bad faith

That part was enough for me. Under these circumstances, not even a conversation can take place let alone a debate. Try to protect yourself from toxic people by not wasting your time with them. I know it’s easier said than done cause I’m trying to recover from a similar situation.