March 2023 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

ETHERIUM circle-of-eunuchs snapshot
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

ETHERIUM - the neo-liberal hegemony you have when you’re not having neo-liberal hegemony. Buttface Buterin just repeated his Bill Gates philanthropy act while ETH-Denver . . . well https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-didn-t-crypto-walk-the-walk-at-ethdenver This network is barely ticking over as circle-of-eunuchs cypherpunk - where’s ma AUGUR rifle!? Reposts not walk-the-talk shining of killer markets

1 0

APster virality guaranteed
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

As the worlds richest men start living with their bodyguards " . . . people are going crazy over a new “kill-to-earn” zombie shooting game . . . " https://cointelegraph.com/magazine/dd-nukes-nft-ban-kill-to-earn-zombie-sho… Apropos of nothing much Avalanche just scored a big new gaming deal. APster is bubbling under and only awaits some Streisands shriek to explode. The original KILLER APP and still the best. " Everyone an assassin ' makes for a polite society. Welcome to the globalized anarchist revolution!

1 0

Re: An application for near-term quantum devices generating cryptographically certified random bits, to use in proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies.
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

Full spectrum quantum computing combined with stronger AI spells doom for Big Dog’s steampunk proof-of-work. Energy use will fall - ergonomic anarchy will reign. DON"T ANYONE TELL BACKSTABBER THIS!

1 0

FDIC Investigators Are on the Premises of Collapsing Federally-Insured, Crypto Related Bank, Silvergate: It’s Not a Friendly Visit
by Gunnar Larson 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2023/03/fdic-investigators-are-on-the-premis… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 8, 2023 ~ Alan Lane, CEO, Silvergate Bank Alan Lane, CEO, Silvergate Bank A very peculiar headline appeared at Bloomberg News yesterday concerning the collapsing federally-insured bank, Silvergate Bank, which became the go-to financial institution over the past few years for crypto exchanges around the globe. The headline read: “Silvergate Is in Talks With FDIC Officials on Ways to Salvage Bank.” That headline moved quickly to other news outlets, which dutifully regurgitated that there was an effort underfoot by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to save Silvergate Bank. Bloomberg News then went further out on a shaky limb with this paragraph: “Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. officials have been discussing with management ways to avoid a shutdown, according to people familiar with the matter. One possible option involves lining up crypto-industry investors to help Silvergate shore up its liquidity, said one of the people. FDIC examiners arrived at the firm’s La Jolla, California, offices last week, the people said.” For starters, “FDIC examiners” are not investment bankers from Goldman Sachs or Perella Weinberg Partners. They don’t arrange mergers and acquisitions. If bank examiners from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation are on the premises of Silvergate Bank, it is because officials of that bank put a big red target on their bank for the Feds on March 1 when it made a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that stated that the bank had concerns about its “ability to continue as a going concern.” The SEC filing also indicated that record-keeping at the bank is so suspect that it can’t even file its annual report for the full year of 2022 (Form 10-K) on time; and it needs more time to “record journal entries.” Equally troubling was the phrase that “its independent registered public accounting firm” will require more time “to complete certain audit procedures, including review of adjustments not yet recorded and the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.” And if all that weren’t enough, it added for good measure that it was under multiple investigations from regulators, Congress and – oops – those folks with criminal prosecution powers – the U.S. Department of Justice. So, to summarize, that devastating information was released seven days ago and yet, yesterday, Bloomberg News’ reporters think that the Feds are on the premises of Silvergate to “salvage” the bank. Here’s an alternative theory: the FDIC bank examiners are on the premises of Silvergate Bank to find out how big a hole there is between what the bank owes to depositors, its cash on hand, and what its liquidated assets might be worth. Silvergate’s ability to find a white knight bidder to “salvage” the bank ended when gutsy U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), John Kennedy (R-LA), and Roger Marshall (R-KS) released a letter on January 30 to the bank’s CEO, Alan Lane. The letter revealed that the bank had been stonewalling the Senators on their inquiries about the bank’s dealings with Sam Bankman-Fried’s collapsed crypto exchange, FTX, and his hedge fund, Alameda Research. Federal prosecutors have charged that Alameda and its principals looted more than $8 billion from FTX customer accounts and the money is missing. The letter from the three Senators to Silvergate CEO Lane explained the situation as follows: “We are disappointed by your evasive and incomplete response to our December 5, 2022 letter regarding Silvergate Bank’s role in the improper transfer of FTX customer funds to cryptocurrency hedge fund Alameda Research (Alameda). We wrote to you seeking information on what appeared to be an egregious failure of your bank’s responsibilities to monitor and report suspicious financial activity. Your response confirms the extent of this failure – but then neglects to provide key information needed by Congress to understand why and how these failures occurred. Moreover, in the month since you provided your inadequate reply to our request for information, new reports have emerged detailing the run Silvergate Bank (Silvergate) faced in the wake of the FTX collapse, and the funding sources the bank turned to as its coffers ran low, further underscoring the need for full transparency from you and your bank. “Most notably, new reports revealed that as it sank further into distress in 2022, Silvergate turned to the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of San Francisco for an injection of cash large enough to ‘stave off a further run on deposits.’ Your bank ‘now holds roughly $4.6 billion in cash,’ the vast majority – $4.3 billion – of which it secured as an advance from the FHLB. By using the FHLB as its functional ‘lender of last resort,’ Silvergate has further introduced crypto market risk into the traditional banking system. If Silvergate were to fail – as have banks facing a fraction of the withdrawal rates Silvergate has faced – FHLB could ‘assert statutory lien priority on other assets – essentially putting the Home Loan bank ahead of all other creditors,’ including the Federal Deposit Insurance Company’s (FDIC) deposit insurance fund. Financial experts have noted that such a scenario could leave the FDIC – and therefore the American taxpayer – holding the bag.” It turns out that the people running Silvergate Bank did not quite grasp the concept of hot money. Hot money can pour in really fast to a bank and boost its deposit base but it can also drain deposits in record time, leaving the bank teetering. On January 5, Silvergate reported to the SEC that its “total deposits from digital asset customers declined to $3.8 billion” as of December 31, 2022 (down from the previously reported $11.9 billion on September 30, 2022.) That’s a 68 percent drop in one quarter – an astonishing figure for a federally-insured bank in the United States. A federally-insured bank is not some local mom and pop bakery that puts a sign on its door that it’s closing due to its rent going up. A federally-insured bank is part of a complex system of deposit insurance that, ultimately, puts the U.S. taxpayer on the hook for unrecouped losses. On an ongoing basis, the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) is funded primarily through quarterly assessments on insured banks. A bank’s assessment is calculated by multiplying its assessment rate by its assessment base. A bank’s assessment base and assessment rate are determined and paid each quarter. According to the FDIC, the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) held $128.2 billion as of December 31 while the total of domestic deposits tallied up to $17.7 trillion. But some of those deposits exceed the insurance limits. According to the FDIC, as of December 31 the Deposit Insurance Fund’s balance was just 1.27 percent of the insured deposits held at the nation’s banks. (See chart above from the FDIC.) That low reserve at the Deposit Insurance Fund has not been a problem heretofore but if crypto fraudsters are allowed by Congress to continue to invade federally-insured banking in the U.S., it could become a problem very fast. That problem would not only raise the cost of insurance premiums to the ethical banks in the system but it could also do serious reputational damage to the safety and soundness of the entire U.S. banking system.

1 0

Cryptoanarchy is the rise of a world-historical challenge to liberal capitalist democracy.
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

A multipolar world was just a rinse - the heavy-duty-cycle's coming up next. And the winner takes it all. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:p2rTsmms2Z4J:https://… Reposts not rootin' for Putin type idiocies

1 0

Cryptoanarchy is ultra vires, agent Starling
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

Outside the constitutional law >>> Cryptocurrency and blockchain-enabled identities and applications can be bought and held by anyone, and they cannot be easily seized by the State, thus presenting an opportunity to build outside of the State: in other words, true Network power. <<< https://thepointmag.com/politics/silicon-or-carbon/ Reposts not tight as a fishes arsehole ideological spectrums

1 0

An application for near-term quantum devices generating cryptographically certified random bits, to use in proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies.
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

Certified Randomness from Quantum Supremacy my dudes - huge if true https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.01625 Reposts not Tleilaxu Ghola proffering hot-chocolate before a hot date

1 0

Mujeres Libres anarcho-feminism
by professor rat 08 Mar '23

08 Mar '23

From Autonomies Mujeres Libres was born from a genealogy that came from the First International, but it fully flourished at a time of social revolution and civil war. Marginalised from the social revolution modeled and monopolised by men, they were able to build a revolution “in their own way”, in the rear. https://autonomies.org/2023/03/mujeres-libres-a-genealogy-of-anarchist-femi… Reposts not reactionary left-fascist garbage from Sivia Federici

1 0

How the World Bank can turn dormant SDRs into billions in new lending
by Gunnar Larson 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

What if there was a giant, untapped treasure trove that the World Bank could mine for tens of billions of dollars in *new, low-cost lending* within the next 12 months? And what if it could make use of Special Drawing Rights – the reserve asset created by the International Monetary Fund, many of which are languishing in central banks and treasuries? Enter the brainchild of two experts. They propose that the World Bank could issue a set of bonds denominated in SDRs <https://t.devex.com/dc/kyXVoDpAY__Vu56MNr4POsOu8-V3XC2wqJP1JI_OWCtc_mhrtlV9…>, a move that *could double the size of the bank’s primary lending wing* and give high-income countries a workaround to existing barriers in using those SDRs to support low-income countries. Shabtai has the details on this fairly technical proposal. All it will take is what he calls “financial wizardry” — so we’ll see if the bank and its shareholders take up the idea.

1 0

USAID’s Goldilocks dilemma. Is USAID's climate ask too big or too small?
by Gunnar Larson 07 Mar '23

07 Mar '23

The U.S. Agency for International Development wants to spend an eye-popping amount of money to battle climate change — but it *wants the private sector to come up with the bulk of it*, raising the question of how realistic the ambitious plan is. On the flip side, “eye-popping” is in the eye of the beholder, and others are slamming the agency for lowballing what’s needed. Out of the $150 billion USAID wants to mobilize <https://t.devex.com/dc/kyXVoDpAY__Vu56MNr4POpCphgeXlcwK-5u_CbLr-mNjyqSrfhQ3…>, it *would only provide a few billion* of its own money, relying on external investors for the rest. The agency acknowledges both the magnitude of what it’s asking for — and that whatever it does garner is just the tip of a multitrillion-dollar iceberg. “The point of this exercise is to *turn a little money into a lot more money*,” says Gillian Caldwell, USAID’s chief climate officer. “It’s not a business-as-usual scenario at USAID right now, and I don’t think we should be expecting business-as-usual results.” But it’s tough to change the business-as-usual mindset of a behemoth bureaucracy, although some are impressed with the plan. “We are glad to see that the administration is putting some money where their mouth is,” Shaun Martin of the World Wildlife Fund says.

1 0