Just to point out how unserious and tragic the cryptocurrency media is. The government is literally trying to ban crypto. The government literally sued Coinbase for publishing wallet software. How much more obvious can it possibly get? The judge dismissed that charge, but kept all the other ones. When are you guys going to get real and notice that cases need to be won, and now.
Do you think it's an accident that the government sued what seems like every large exchange? Do you think it's an accident they made it harder to custody, harder to trade, harder to get bank accounts for crypto companies? Do you think it's an accident they had to be ruled arbitrary and capricious by the courts after delaying the Bitcoin ETP (aka ETF) for over decade?
The government is strongly working to violate your rights to freedom of speech, and association, and I remember a time not so long ago when they annihilated your freedom of movement. Some movement restrictions are still in place even.
Here's another example of them trying to ban crypto, and some smart lawyers response to it. Scroll to the end for First Amendment analysis. https://t.co/4I9XDueKjs
Some of us are fighting for your rights. It'd be nice if others would make some effort or at least cover it so that those with courage might know it's their time to act.
I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal or financial advice. I'm just someone working real hard to protect your rights.
What would you do if they made #cryptocurrency illegal? Well I hate to break it to you, I think they are trying to. If you pretend every token is a security, than you can pretend that minting new tokens as block rewards when miners/validators publishing speech on chain is issuing securities. That makes mining illegal.
And if you offer to publish public speech on the blockchain in exchange for the native token, which must have value to act as spam protection (the demand for free storage is infinite.) then you can pretend that's offering a security. That also makes mining/validating illegal.
Why isn't anyone else upset about this? Well, I guess their brains don't work that good. Or they don't know how to read? Or they're just ignorant? But sir, you've been tweeting about this non stop for months now. Yes, that's true, but people appear to be, uh.... Not so smart.
So yeah, I'm insulting your intelligence, personally, because you don't understand the really clear words that I'm speaking to you, and hope that you take the threat more seriously. I really super duper think that this case is really super duper important, and if you're not actively trying to help see good precedent set, then you're risking that crypto just becomes illegal, by pretending that speech is a security.
I am not a lawyer. This is not legal or financial advice. You need to understand how important this case is, and well paid lawyers really should be creating amicus briefs immediately, the case is ripe now.
Stop being so oblivious. I have been here in crypto long before you, and I will be here long after you. Let the knowledge I'm sharing with you into your brain.
Here's a really well written legal explanation of the speech implications (scroll to the end) https://t.co/4I9XDueKjs
How can a potential ban on cryptocurrency get so little attention? Upgrade your discourse. Smart lawyers, get to writing. Or ask yourself, why are my lawyers able to write and understand the First Amendment arguments that yours appear not to? I hate sharing such good information with people that desperately need it, to see it go unused.
You're lucky the directly sued a cryptocurrency with a great fact pattern and named the cryptocurrency directly, which makes their intent more obvious. Good precedent set benefits everyone. Bad precedent set harms everyone. Be part of the solution. Get the word out.
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
Sorry for the harsh tone, but being all nice about it didn't get anyone to improve their behavior. Lawyers and those that pay them have a chance to make a positive impact on precedent through amicus, and the window is closing soon.
Things people don't understand about $INC.
1. You nearly always have to buy PLS or PLSX to get it, because that's the pairs people put their liquidity in. Look at the auto-router pic to see a path. Or you can farm it.
2. The majority of the liquidity is also farming INC. https://t.co/3KaKoosmst (Lazy link, not as secure as running the PulseX software locally.)
3. The higher the INC price, the higher the rewards to farmers, Notice that every farming pair has WPLS except one. You see HEX and PLSX on that list of farms as well.
I don't link INC more than PLS, PLSX, or HEX, but it's gone up the hardest and the chart is the chart. There's a chance it might bring a different type of speculator into the ecosystem, who knows.
The best meme coin on PulseChain? Up ~13x price in 82 days, at a new local high. $131M market cap. $42M is in liquidity in https://t.co/vZIuPqYbeW. That's a very high % of liquidity to total market cap. It is, was and can only be minted by farming in https://t.co/vZIuPqYbeW. $INC