humanizersequel

>Looks like Coinbase currently makes up 10% of Eth staking. Would this give special privileges to Coinbase over other exchanges?

No.

>[arbitrary non-BTC token]'s goal would be for speculative trading

I doubt this claim with extreme prejudice.

>Does Coinbase stake on the user's behalf?

Yes. While blockchains like Ethereum are open protocols and staking is permissionless, it isn't exactly easy if you aren't savvy and/or somewhat well off already. The value add here is an IT service.

>Do they take a cut?

Yes, between 15 and 35 percent.

>What is Coinbase doing with the staked crypto?

Nothing, staking involves "locking" your crypto in exchange for the privilege of running a validator. This is equivalent to "mining" in a proof-of-work protocol, and comes with similar rewards from the protocol in exchange for securing the network (with the risk that if you deviate from consensus, your staked crypto could be "slashed"). Coinbase operates the validator on your behalf.

>Don't regular banks turn your deposits into investments (securities) that provide returns which become your interest?

I'm not sure every investment is a security (some of them are just loans), but more or less.

>Is the idea here that Coinbase is doing nothing but passing your crypto to the 'investment banks' to trade with and earn your return, then just depositing that 'interest' back?

Lol no.

> I could write multiple mortgages and roll them up into an MBS myself too, isn't the bank just doing the technical work there too

The bank is quite literally writing multiple loans and selling a security. I fail to see how providing tools for customers to more easily put up their tokens as collateral for the privilege of writing new chunks of data to a blockchain (and reaping the rewards) is at all equivalent to either activity.

I admit that the name "Coinbase Earn" and the marketing material could be construed as misleading (but not that misleading).

>Based on comments here, because they called it “staking as a service”.

You could reply to my comment instead of obliquely referencing it here.

>this very clear and explicit definition

This is a definition of an exchange (specifically a securities exchange), but nobody is contesting that Coinbase has an exchange product, just whether the assets for which they operate the exchange are securities or not.

Coinbase Earn is not "bringing together purchasers and sellers", because people staking their crypto are doing neither. Putting up some collateral in exchange for the privilege to validate blocks and collect a reward for doing so cannot possibly fall under a reasonable function "commonly performed by a stock exchange".

>Coinbase taking money from depositors, loaning it out, and giving the depositors interest from the loan, is a security product.

What Coinbase product does this? I was under the impression all of "Coinbase earn" was just staking-as-a-service.

>He would say that because he wants jurisdiction

You can make the same argument about the SEC.

There is an official release of minecraft optimized for the Pi: https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/edition/pi

I haven't seen the option to correct a translation in years.

Not allowed to leave the lion and the cabbage together

There is a link to LiveATC. It isn't clearly labeled, but that isn't required in the TOS and since this site has been up since at least November of 2021, I expect they're fine with it.

>you agree to consult LiveATC.net prior to linking directly to any of the audio streams

Why jump to that conclusion? She could have consulted with them while building this.

>If I don’t buy homeowners insurance and some arsonist burns down my house, I’m out $100k to rebuild. Is it punishing me if the government doesn’t bail me out? The government isn’t punishing me, the arsonist punished me.

The distinction here is that in this metaphor, the bank managers are both the homeowner and the arsonist.

>And their post is saying that they are owed a full bailout because they participated in the bank run on the day of the bank run, and also begging for a full bailout.

Where in this post does it say that?

ETH is probably a bigger domino than Bitcoin right now.

>They can't set the rules individually for each "problematic" bank.

Can't they?

Short term treasuries. They're a liquidity provider for the US government.

>owned in big part by Coinbase

How much of Circle is owned by Coinbase?

I've also been under the (possibly incorrect) impression that the majority of Circle's dealings are with exchanges like Coinbase — parties who are probably willing and able to play some inside baseball in terms of dealing with duration mismatch and waiting out the feds.

Edit: Yeah, they are very strict with who they interact with — individuals cannot exchange their USDC for dollars directly with Circle: https://www.circle.com/en/legal/acceptable-use-policy.

This is an interesting concept, could you share a paper or some writeup about this?

>"In chess pieces have identity and thus differentiated functions, in go they don't. At the level of state/war machine there are also functionaries: the president, the general, but also interchangeable parts: soldiers, workers."

I'm pretty sure you're agreeing with me in a roundabout way, but for posterity: this is clearly not a lossless compression.

>Profound and true ideas can always be put in simple language.

Sure, you can reduce the passage above to "Chess is a game of specific, regimented roles, whereas Go is characterized an emergent, contingent understanding of purpose" — but you lose a lot of information compressing it like that, in the same way you lose a lot of information when you tell kids that black holes work like a bowling bowl on a trampoline. Sure, neither are incorrect at a phenomenological level, but it's such a reductive understanding that you can't accurately reason about it without reintroducing the "complicated words and sentences".

>You could easily write the same thing more clearly in no more space.

I certainly couldn't, and I have spent a reasonable amount of time studying Nomadology (the text from which this passage is taken). Why don't you give it a shot? Put your money where your mouth is, let's say just the second paragraph, as that's the more serious offender in terms of jargon. I sincerely don't think you can rewrite it to be ~12 lines, forgoing all the technical jargon used, and retain all of the semantic content.

Frankly, barring a demonstration of this task you could supposedly "easily" accomplish, it reads like you're just denigrating the writing because you can't understand it.

People love to say this, but this is extremely dense writing riddled with technical language, written for people trained in reading it. You could perhaps eliminate some of the jargon, but in doing so you'd have to substitute a book's worth of less "florid" writing to get the same point across.

I am one of the "contemporary youth populace" and will second his comment.

Or even more stringent verification will become the norm.

Not quite midnight sun, but one of the most magical experiences of my life was staying up all night on the side of a proglacial river and watching the sun go down... just to have it come up again an hour or so later a couple mountains to the right. It never even fully went down, which is why I never fully went to sleep.

I don't think the original Avatar was particularly "woke", what makes you say that?

Edit: and Avatar 2 is not an example of a "new IP"

This would be disproportionately used as a tool against extremely small corporations without the budget to fight the "sentence" or weather out even a short shutdown.

Lots of good examples already mostly geared around minimizing bits leaked for the sake of alpha, but there are also instances where it is desirable to be "locally clandestine" even if you're a full throated supporter of the powers that be on the whole. Persecution does not just come by way of financial penalties or the legal system, these tools are useful for avoiding social consequences as well. A hypothetical I'd expect to play well here: paying for an abortion in a large state where it is legal, but in a small town where the local church wields an immense amount of influence.