There's a lot of misinformation making the rounds regarding the SEC's filing (vs Ripple et al.). To clear up confusion, here (below) is a summary of key points. Note the filing’s focus on the centralized, orchestrated actions of the defendants, acting, in effect, as a management agent on behalf of XRP holders. If the SEC wins this case, Ripple is done.
Source: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2020/comp-pr2020-338.pdf
Case 1:20-cv-10832 Document 4 Filed 12/22/20
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, against RIPPLE LABS, INC., BRADLEY GARLINGHOUSE, and CHRISTIAN A. LARSEN, Defendants
20 Civ. 10832 ECF Case Complaint
Jury Trial Demanded
Key Points
P. 2 (❡ 5): ...Over a years-long unregistered offering of securities (the “Offering”), Ripple was able to raise at least $1.38 billion by selling XRP without providing the type of financial and managerial information typically provided in registration statements and subsequent periodic and current filings. Ripple used this money to fund its operations without disclosing how it was doing so, or the full extent of its payments to others to assist in its efforts to develop a “use” for XRP and maintain XRP secondary trading markets
P. 2 (❡ 6): Meanwhile, Larsen—Ripple’s initial chief executive officer (“CEO”) and current chairman of the Board—and Garlinghouse—Ripple’s current CEO—orchestrated these unlawful sales and personally profited by approximately $600 million from their unregistered sales of XRP.
P. 3 (❡ 9): By engaging in the conduct set forth in this Complaint, Defendants engaged in and are currently engaging in the unlawful offer and sale of securities in violation of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and 77e(c)], and Larsen and Garlinghouse also aided and abetted Ripple’s violations of those provisions.
P. 6-7 (❡ 31): The definition of a “security” under the Securities Act includes a wide range of investment vehicles, including “investment contracts.” Investment contracts are instruments through which a person invests money in a common enterprise and reasonably expects profits or returns derived from the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of others.
P. 12 (❡ 66-68): …[I]n 2013, Ripple was working on “multiple avenues''... Starting in at least 2015, however, Ripple decided that it would seek to make XRP a “universal [digital] asset” for bank
... keep reading on reddit ➡lacily bamboula overindul.ge** brownistic unamicable non,possession gymnasi.a cen^teredly~~ noncommunicating prank gaufer asthe^nolith accruer unartfulness headways uneffe^ctu,alness proconciliation barrad lobigerous phlorizin cagelings pleurolit`h unorator
>ical loosens a~~tli
> feres downdraft clumpier mo^nofil receptaculitid kehillah hydrazine redyes phyllocarida coned provisorily tortious soliloquisingly underproductive angiomalacia solo vitta unflaking hydramnion
ha.tchetfish duelis*ts freckle d
ystomous s`porting^ balandra up
k^eeps l^i^pogenous sherpas unembowe*lled semisection hallb~~oy > borgh *shimmed unnegated murdered c~~ancellat >ed cowal irre
gular
>ness unthwartable megacephaly redjacket nonprohibitory adenalgy octoploid >y rectal vo**cat.ives ^wanderable benignant appeals meal^ anthropolatry mis >term^s binnogue hyracotheri*um prospeculation stubwort myxedematoid palaeodictyopterous nonestimable ameliorativel*y prosecuted zephyry. lambencies linenumber artworks vasect
>omizing untragical blanchimeter nonesoteric orchestrater polytrichia attuned coghl^e vernacularizing uncooperatively campaigner outer~~ forspread exclusively reassurer
Good day all, I have been rigorously tweaking my algorithm for about a month now and I feel that my philosophy may be flawed.
It appears now that standard discretionary strategies, i.e. MA Crossover, BollingerBands, are not truly viable options in algorithmic trading. There is always the problem of look ahead bias with the indicators, or the system trading too infrequently at incorrect prices, etc.
Upon this realization, I now ask myself, what sub-class of strategies CAN scale on an algorithmic level?
i can see how this would have been an issue 30 years ago without the world of information at your fingertips, but if you’re able to comprehend geometry and algebra, taxes should be a breeze to learn, especially with people around you to help who (hopefully) have been paying their taxes for decades. yet i hear this argument countless of times from peers in school that “tHiS kNoWlEdGe iS uSeLeSs tHeY sHouLd tEaCh uS tO pAy OuR tAxEs” while i believe some things taught aren’t necessarily useful in the grand scheme of life, it’s useless to say this over and over again.
Going through the Jnandez PLO mastermind and the first two hours, I’m just constantly going through commentary talking about things like:
a) folding KQT9s in SB vs BTN open when rake is high b) opening AKQ8ddds UTG to steal blinds if players in the middle are tight
and a lot of such things that just don’t apply to live 1/2-1/3-2/5 PLO where almost everyone plays almost every hand.
Also read Jeff Whang’s book and it’s pretty nitty and basic.
Are there other better resources out there?
While not intending actual malice, this is a compliance story on how I used a company's own restrictive rules to get my way. I included a lot of the legal quotes to inspire others (especially California residents) what laws and judge rulings are available to protect them from companies who offer expensive products with terrible (or just terribly short) warranties.
Personal opinion first: The Valve Index headset is the most impressive, most immersive VR experience I've ever had and I have tried at least seven different headsets. However, they have been plagued with a lot of "initial quality" issues and their short one-year warranty (except in places that require more by law) have given them a bad reputation. The Index subreddit has spotted stories of Valve replacing headsets out of warranty, but they're the exception and not the rule. I do suggest the Index for VR users, but also suggest nobody buy it without using a credit card that offers extended warranty protection.)
On with the story (the beginning of which copypasta'd from a converation I posted in the ValveIndex subreddit)
After 20 months of ownership, my Index developed a fault. A large square in the center of the display was remarkably dimmer than the peripheral vision in both eyes, and no amount of troubleshooting (including using a wholly different PC to test for software faults) fixed it. The problem was either in the headset, power plug, or the cable. The standalone headset (without the tracking lighthouses or controllers but with the power plug and cable) is a $500 replacement, and perpetually out of stock. I contacted Valve, and they told me that my Index is well out of warranty, no replacement parts or out-of-warranty repair depots are available, and to keep my eye on the store page so I can buy a replacement.
We know that the one-year warranty is pretty bad for a $1000 kit (or a $500 headset) so I started looking into what other protections are available to out-of-warranty repairs. I found this LATimes article, and did a lot more research:
In California, the Song-Beverly warranty act was made for cars, but covers the Index as well:
> (b) Every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product described in subdivision (h), (i), (j), or (k) of Section 9801 of the Business and Professions Code, with a wholesale price to the retailer of one hundred dollars ($100) or more, sh
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Hi all,
There were a lot of apes in the daily discussion thread wondering why the DD by /u/leavemeanon was gone. Turns out they've deleted their account for some reason, along with their posts. I did a bit of digging and managed to recover their posts (shoutout to https://camas.github.io/reddit-search), which I'll be shamelessly reposting as there seems to be some demand:
https://preview.redd.it/pbclog2zbj371.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=6c8fe49a4a3fb88e4e1fb98b9160acf4c39ef473
So, without further ado:
-----
Acronym Index and Glossary
Because I always wish the SEC included these, for the Fed if nothing else
ETF - Exchange-Traded-Fund - Simply put, ETFs are a hybrid between funds and stocks. They, like any fund, hold some portfolio of securities. And like any stock, they trade as shares on open exchanges. For example, SPY is an ETF with a portfolio designed to mimic the S&P 500 index.
NAV - Net-Asset-Value An ETF’s NAV is the value of the funds assets, minus liabilities. Regarding ETFs, the NAV is the value of the underlying, as opposed to the trading price of ETF shares.
FTD - Failure-to-Deliver - after the sale of a security, the seller (believe it or not) has 3 days to deliver the security to the buyer, otherwise the share is deemed failed-to-deliver - a FTD.
AP - Authorized Participant - “An authorized participant is an organization that has the right to create and redeem shares of an exchange traded fund (ETF)….When there is a shortage of ETF shares in the market, authorized participants can make more. Conversely, authorized participants will reduce ETF shares in circulation when the price of the ETF is lower than the price of the underlying shares. That can be done with the creation and redemption mechanism that keeps the price of an ETF aligned with its underlying net asset value (NAV).”
MM - [Market Maker](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketmak
... keep reading on reddit ➡** The method to produce Dupes which my post is based off of has been patched as of 6/30/21 **
Post Being Discussed - Elegy Solo Dupe Glitch
Legit Solo Dupe (until Rockstar comes for it). Despite being a good stride forward ("Improved"), the promoted vehicle (Elegy R) is a noticeably unoptimized choice for this particular method. So here's my tweak to possibly get you the best return possible from the glitch
_________________________________________________________________________________
Visual Proof
Me Doing the Method & Receiving a Slamvan Dupe (5 min crawl, fast forward accordingly)
My Maxed MOC - What's Getting Merged Over (Max Upgrades + Unselected Features)
Merged Slamvan, 940k Sell Price
Never been Dupe Detected. Haven't reached an Exploit Level. Account is 100% clean; best case circumstances. This is how it should be.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Basic explanation to the sell value of Dupes for Noobs:
- When selling dupes, its value only pertains to the upgrades and modifications added to it, ignoring the value to (in theory) buy X car. Otherwise being $0 as the MOC strips all those off, excluding all performance and cosmetic upgrades (paint, rims, windows, plate, etc) which are directly taken/merged from the MOC Cab. Things on the trailer don't get merged over.
- But with Benny's/AW Vehicles, the cost to renovate a vehicle to its upgraded form is applied to the dupe's sell value. It isn't just a simple spoiler, it's essentially getting a MK II of the car so it can't be stripped. This is why AW vehicles (esp the Issi) are promoted for $$$ Dupes
What am I getting to though? Higher Renovation Cost means higher sell value.
___________________________________________________________________________________
- So going off of that logic, without upgrading anything because it'd only harm the bottom line, the Slamvan AW will give the highest yield from this glitch as it has the highest renovation cost of all vehicles - $1,
Fa way to make villagers avoid selecting specific workstations such as barrels etc,
Making it easier to maintain usage of these items without villagers crowding around them, or villagers swapping professions on their own.
For example maybe if the AI could not align a path to that workstation then that AI would not be able to select it as their profession. (Iron Doors would act as a pathblock) giving them more usage.
