Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Feds Shut Down Allegedly Fraudulent Cryptocurrency Offering (arstechnica.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the first-of-its-kind dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday announced that it was taking action against an initial coin offering (ICO) that the SEC alleges is fraudulent. The announcement represents the first enforcement action by the SEC's recently created cyber fraud unit. In July, the agency fired a warning shot. It announced that a 2016 fundraising campaign had run afoul of securities law, but that the SEC would decline to prosecute those responsible. The hope was to get the cryptocurrency world to take securities laws more seriously without doing anything drastic. Now the SEC is taking the next step by prosecuting what it considers to be one of the most egregious scams in the ICO world. The SEC's complaint, filed in federal court in New York, is against Dominic Lacroix, whom the SEC describes as a "recidivist securities law violator." The SEC considers Lacroix's cryptocurrency project, PlexCoin, to be a "fast-moving Initial Coin Offering (ICO) fraud that raised up to $15 million from thousands of investors since August by falsely promising a 13-fold profit in less than a month." The PlexCoin website has a hilariously vague description of this supposedly revolutionary cryptocurrency. "The PlexCoin's new revolutionary operating structure is safer and much easier to use than any other current cryptocurrency," the site proclaims. "One of the many features of PlexBank will be to secure your cryptocurrency from market variation, which is highly volatile, and invest your money in a place where you can get interesting guaranteed returns." According to Ars, "The SEC isn't impressed and is arguing that PlexCoin has 'all of the characteristics of a full-fledged cyber scam.' The agency is seeking to freeze the assets of the PlexCoin project in hopes of getting investors' funds back to them."

47 comments

  1. *COIN IS A FRAUD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We know, but THEY don't, and WE WIN and THEY LOSE!

  2. yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YEEESSSSSSS!!!!

    Move the US embassy to Jerusalem NOW!!!

    I'm loving it

  3. What's 1 + 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you make the answer, make people stupid?

    This is a bit absurd, so is promising 13 to 1 earnings but on that token so is programming the world with numbers.

    Why be such fucking idiots?

    I mean seriously, why not just fuck a flower petal's growth rates or something? It's about as random.

    Cunt whores.

  4. Wait what? 13! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    13 Fold guaranteed? WTF... why

    All I can think of Tommy boy. "A guarantee piece of crap"

    Whoever buys this is proof of the failures of education and fiscal responsibility in America.

    1. Re:Wait what? 13! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Whoever buys this is proof of the failures of education and fiscal responsibility in America.

      I'm sorry, were you describing this latest scheme, or the current one ongoing?

      You act like the crap we call "bitcoin" ripping through the markets is any less full of shit than this one...

  5. Cyberscam? Nay, good ole Ponzi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean cripes do they have to pretend something is 'new' and 'cyber' when it is literally the same old crap just slapped on a new platform or technology?

    The guaranteed 13 fold increase in profits said it all to me.

    1. Re:Cyberscam? Nay, good ole Ponzi! by sheramil · · Score: 1

      I mean cripes do they have to pretend something is 'new' and 'cyber' when it is literally the same old crap just slapped on a new platform or technology?

      it's also quantum maker blockchain AI nanotech disruptive AND egregious, which is the word of the moment. EGREGIOUS!

  6. I'm into crypto-currencies by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    I have some BTC, LTC, Doge, XMR, etc.

    But almost all of those "initial coin offerings"? Stay away from those!

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      So you bought into fake money, where the originators ground out something like fifty percent of the available coins, what, to make them rich? Watch out for the bitcoin bomb, it is bitcoin holders who are at the moment being set up to be mined for the real currency.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Watch out for the bitcoin bomb

      How long have they said that? Yet BC never stops rising. Yesterdays people see it as a 'bubble': It was supposed to have popped once BC reached $5000, once it reached $7500, once it reached $10000 ,,, The reality is that BC is still finding its true price. It looks like it won't move much above $15000, so buy in now if you want to make anything out if this at all. Seriously this was the chance of your lifetime ... and you missed out. At least salvage something.

      Alternatively if you want to make real money out of the emerging blockchain technology get in quick ...

    3. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      You didn't need to buy anything a few years ago, faucets gave a few thousand satoshis per request. Those days are long gone, though.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet BC never stops rising.

      Obviously, you do not fully grasp the concept of a "bubble"

      The reality is that BC is still finding its true price.

      The only intelligent sentence in your post. That "true price" could very well be $0

    5. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Your point appears to be that things don't increase in value forever.

      Pretty fucking facile, obvious point. It appears to have risen higher than you ever thought possible.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    6. Re:I'm into crypto-currencies by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, it has risen higher than I thought possible. But as it has no underpinnings so it can collapse totally. It probably won't, there are still people who buy tulips. But it wouldn't surprise me if it did. And it's already at the point where it's extravagantly expensive to operate.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  7. You know what's not a fraud? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    A chance to win up to $200 worth of Bitcoin every hour, for free!

  8. It's pretty in two ways by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    It's pretty in two ways: pretty stupid, and pretty likely to stay that way.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  9. Here's what you need to know about ICOs by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    ICOs are illegal methods of commercial fundraiser in almost all countries and they're basically Kickstarter and GoFundMe but less reliable with less accountability and zero oversight. That is not an exaggeration, that is exactly how I describe it.

    1. Re:Here's what you need to know about ICOs by Aighearach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Horse shit. The US is a significant country, and ICOs are totally legal here.

      What was illegal and fraudulent about this one was that they advertised returns that had no objective basis. If you want to promise return on investment, you have to have some sort of history to show, or at least some reasonable assumptions. If you just make up a crazy number and say people will earn that much you're gonna get the smackdown.

      The SEC is being very clear here; this case is about false promises.

    2. Re: Here's what you need to know about ICOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not for long, big government is going to ban it since it lets people buy pot. The GOP, aka Grabby Old Pedophile party is 100% on board with telling you what to do. The Dems are mom wanting to you eat veggies and do homework. The Repubs are the alcoholic dad beating you for not mowing the lawn, but the GOP does it with speeding tickets, cops and prisons.

    3. Re: Here's what you need to know about ICOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > big government is going to ban it since it lets people buy pot.

      Right, because it's /so/ difficult to buy pot with real money, in actual stores, legally. In NH and Maine, anyway. You should move to civilization.

      --
      BMO

    4. Re: Here's what you need to know about ICOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dems want to pay you for not mowing the lawn nor eating your vegetables.

    5. Re:Here's what you need to know about ICOs by torkus · · Score: 1

      I watched this one from the beginning...

      They talked it up left right and center. Can't imagine what they paid for advertising but it was significant as well.

      Their site promised all kinds of things besides the crazy return rates - the primary one being the ability to move money in and out via a 'plex card' which basically let you spend your plex coins as cash. Mind you, that's a great feature but not the easiest to implement (to say the least). Currently they're 'asking for beta testers' for 20ish of those cards. Give it a few months and they'll roll them out ... well probably not since they'll be insolvent and shut down by various gov't agencies.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  10. They shutdown Bitcoin?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ohh, a different one. OK.

  11. A Plexcard for Ether by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is compatible with the regular banking system?!?
    This site was indeed too good to be true.

  12. 1 down lots more to go. by Mr307 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They are all some hybrid of a ponzi/pyramid/mlm scam.

    Certainly someone will come along and say how 'you dont know how they work, so you dont know what you are talking about'.

    And thats fine, but it appears that the scarcity feature isn't. When an infinite number of 'coins' can be made on a whim, anyone can make Super Bitcoin tomorrow then the day after the next brainiac can make Super Duper Bitcoin, then we'll get Super Ultra Duper Bitcoin(the bestest ever), and so on.

    So there is no overarching scarcity, yes there may be scarcity within a particular set but any set can be forked or duplicated with no restrictions, and new sets made to infinity. Any perceived value appears to have more to do with marketing, speculation and wishful thinking than anything 'real'.

    1. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that there are hundreds of countries with currencies right? They are not all equal either and each is subject to speculation too. Some crypto currencies have more value than others. The more demand, the more real world use, etc the more a crypto currency is going to be worth. That demand is going to be impacted by all sorts of factors. Like anonymity, stability, it's real world usability, the level of adoption, and other factors.

      Bitcoin's value is that it's got a solid track record. It's proven imperfect and has opened up the door for other crypto currencies to emerge. That isn't a bad thing. In fact it's exactly what should happen and why the source code being available is a GOOD thing. Imagine if it was proprietary. We maybe wouldn't have seen the success its had nor solutions to the problems faced- like increasing fees.

      A little overview of some of the crypto currencies that have real world use cases or potential and why you'll likly see these crypto currencies out performing others. However this does not mean there aren't others which will be valued more so than one of the below and as things develop one crypto currency may become more valuable than another as a crypto currency depends on more than just a fork existing. Forking in and of itself doesn't equal success.

      Bitcoin's value today is in its long established track record and real world use. It's not perfect and at some point we may see other crypto currencies surpass it.

      Dash is self-promoting by design and its development efforts are community oriented and there is work on solving some of the problems facing Bitcoin before they hurt the crypto currency. High fees and scaling issues. Right now the biggest thing going for Dash and why Dash is valuable right now is the low fees and it's self-promoting aspects, and as a result its support by a retail point of sale app. AnyPay is relatively new, but likely to replace and has started to replace BitPay as the go to point of sale app for retailers. The reason is BitPay has refused to support other crypto currencies and Bitcoin's fees have ruined Bitcoin for use at a large majority of retail businesses. There is also another competitor that may be entering the market as they have an app that can be adapted and fixed for use as a retail point of sale app. There is a upcoming meeting amongst the most important people spreading crypto currency adoption to brick and mortar retailers anywhere in the world here in New Hampshire with this set of developers in the works. New Hampshire by the way has two cities with more crypto accepting business on a per capita basis than anywhere else in the world. Southern New Hampshire though overall is #1 relative to any region in the world and that is due to the widespread support amongst Free State Project participants. This is a migration of those who believe in liberty and freedom above "safety" from across the US and around the world to NH for the purpose of getting active in bringing about *one* free place for which we whom like freedom can call home (ie everywhere is getting worse and spread out there is no hope).

      Monero is basically got real world use and value because it has pseudo anonymity that other crypto currencies lack. This has led to adoption by dark markets. It's apparently the crypto currency to buy drugs with right now. It's biggest down fall and why it may eventually or currently doesn't have the potential value it could is because of Zcash and actual provable anonymity. It also doesn't apparently have support on phones due to needing a full node.

      ZCash is not where it is at today- but one everyone should keep an eye on for the future. It probably has the most potential relative to any other crypto currency. ZCash has basically got the math down for provable anonymity and the code to back it up. There has been genuine research, papers, and analysis by expert third parties. It's got the academics behind it and real world support- not just developers or users. What it currently lacks is support by a point of sale a

    2. Re:1 down lots more to go. by CptJeanLuc · · Score: 1

      Some people need protection from themselves, and it is good to see SEC is trying to do just that.

      Cryptocurrencies in their current form is a hopeless project. It is completely unsuited for regular payment transactions, because you cannot hold bitcoin without also speculating. I want to be able to pay for goods and getting paid for work without having the value of my wallet fluctuating plus minus tens of percent points on a daily basis.

      As a financial investment instruments, it is completely hopeless as its "value" is based on nothing tangible at all, and so it really is nothing but some kind of psychological lottery. With the underlying infrastructure operated by shady people.

      And ethically, it is not so good to have a "currency" which relies on vast energy consumption, adding significantly to climate change effects.

      The sooner this bubble bursts, the better.

    3. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      Someone really needs to launch TulipCoin.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A crypto currency doesn't really need to offer anything more than it already does to be a store of value. That's all it is. You invest and push up the price. The earlier you invest the more valuable your assets are worth - scarcity. If you feel your crypto is losing value you pull your coins and reinvest them elsewhere or trade them for fiat. It's a free market. When bitcoin forks or the netwrok gets bloated people move some of the hodlings into ethereum or another currency. Depending on the country, Chinese people might put some in Neo, Japanese into NEM and Monacoin etc. Still better ROI than keeping in rapidly devaluing FIAT.
      It's a free market - if a currency forks a lot it loses value but you also get the dividend of having money in the fork automatically. All bitcoin holders got an equal amount of bitcoin cash. But , bitcoin could be at $20,000 already were it not for the fork.

    5. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's your tulip coin (one of them at least): https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/inflationcoin/

    6. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ridiculous, people are using it as payments and transferring value every day. If you can't see the value, it doesn't mean there isn't any value there.

    7. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Maritz · · Score: 0

      Seems to be dozens of you going on about tulips. Safe to say, everyone has the memo now. Stop being quite so fucking boring.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    8. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      If you're bored about hearing about tulips, here are some other famous bubbles, all of which lead to people who went all in losing all their money

      https://www.investopedia.com/a...

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re:1 down lots more to go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they actually understood the memo, we wouldn't be seeing so many cryptocurrency articles.

    10. Re:1 down lots more to go. by torkus · · Score: 2

      *yawn* More posts about this than useful things said about crypto currency in these threads i think (well, tulips and trump).

      We get the point. Many of us remember the 90s tech bubble and almost all know the late 2000s mortgage bubble/financial crisis.

      Nowadays, tech stocks are major market players and many of the biggest today were founded in the 90s among all the others which went poof (you may have heard of google, amazon, paypal, ebay, etc). My point being that not everything goes poof with a bubble.

      Most of the ICOs are getting money because laymen are speculating with play money. Throw $100 each into a few coins and see what happens...because they know full well if they did that the first time they heard of bitcoin they'd be retiring today. I would too.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  13. Stop this government madness by plopez · · Score: -1

    The Government is interfering with with efforts of hardworking business leaders. Let's go back to the good old days of the 19th and early 20th century when financial markets were unfettered and were allowed to find the most efficient solution to gaining profits for banks and brokerages.

    Those bureaucrats have no idea how hard it is to line up marks, oops I meant customers, to make an honest profit.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Stop this government madness by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can make a case that the subprime mortgage crisis was caused by the government forcing banks to lend money to people who were likely to default

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Several administrations, both Democratic and Republican, advocated affordable housing policies in the years leading up to the crisis. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 established, for the first time, an affordable housing loan purchase mandate for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a mandate to be regulated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Initially, the 1992 legislation required that 30 percent or more of Fannie's and Freddie's loan purchases be related to affordable housing. However, HUD was given the power to set future requirements. During the later part of the Clinton Administration, HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced "new regulations to provide $2.4 trillion in mortgages for affordable housing for 28.1 million families, which increased the required percentage of mortgage loans for low- and moderate-income families that finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must buy annually from the then current 42 percent of their total purchases to a new high of 50 percent. Eventually (under the Bush Administration) a 56 percent minimum was established. Additionally, in 2003, "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago."

      Fanny and Freddy were encouraged to underwrite loans to people who shouldn't have got them. Banks knew the FDIC would bail them out and that they were 'too big to fail' so if the FDIC ran out of cash the government could either print money and fix things or see the whole economy disappear.

      They also knew if they made profits they could keep them.

      The whole system had the wrong set of incentives. People got bonuses and social brownie points for lending to people who couldn't afford the interest. Banks privatised profit and knew they could socialise loss.

      When it came time to bail the whole system out Hank Paulson, formerly of Goldman Sachs, decided to do QE by buying T bills on the open market, which allowed Goldman Sachs to front run the Fed instead of buying them from the Treasury directly.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      And Paulson had a clear conflict of interest

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      It has been pointed out that Paulson's plan could potentially have some conflicts of interest, since Paulson was a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, a firm that might benefit largely from the plan. Economic columnists called for more scrutiny of his actions. Questions remain about Paulson's interest, despite having no direct financial interest in Goldman, since he had sold his entire stake in the firm prior to becoming Treasury Secretary, pursuant to ethics law. The Goldman Sachs benefit from the AIG bailout was recently estimated as US$12.9 billion and GS was the largest recipient of the public funds from AIG. Creating the collateralized debt obligations (CDO's) forming the basis of the current crisis was an active part of Goldman Sach's business during Paulson's tenure as CEO. Opponents argued that Paulson remained a Wall Street insider who maintained close friendships with higher-ups of the bailout beneficiaries.

      And of course QE only helps very rich people by blowing up asset prices

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      People like Buffett maneuver the government into policies that make them billions and then write editorials advocating tax increases that would cost them millions as a quid pro quo.

      I.e. t

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Stop this government madness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So close and yet so far. From the same wiki page you linked to

      "The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (majority report), Federal Reserve economists, and several academic researchers have stated that government affordable housing policies were not the major cause of the financial crisis.[6][112] They also state that Community Reinvestment Act loans outperformed other "subprime" mortgages, and GSE mortgages performed better than private label securitizations."

    3. Re:Stop this government madness by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I saw that too. However look at the WIki for the FCIC

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Set its composition of 10 members, appointed on a bipartisan and bicameral basis in consultation with relevant Committees. Six members are to be chosen by the congressional majority, the Democrats (three of these by the Speaker of the House and three by the Senate Majority Leader) and four by the congressional minority, the Republicans (two from the House Minority Leader and two from the Senate Minority Leader).

      So it was 6:4 Democrat to Republican. So the majority report will obviously reflect Democrat talking points. What about the minority? Well they all disagreed

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Look at the Wallison statement

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      American Enterprise Institute senior fellow Peter Wallison authored a 93-page dissent in which he disagreed with both the majority report and the three other Republican appointees. Wallison argued that the US government's housing policies-implemented primarily through the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-caused the financial crisis. In specific, Wallison named the GSEs' Affordable Housing goals, heightened enforcement of the Community Reinvestment Act, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Best Practices Initiative as the primary culprits. According to Wallison, these programs, which were intended to give low- and moderate-income borrowers better access to mortgage credit, ultimately required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce the mortgage underwriting standards they used when acquiring loans from originators. Because the GSEs dominated the mortgage market, they set the underwriting standards for the entire industry and pushed private institutions into riskier loans. Wallison concludes that these policies fueled a massive housing bubble full of non-traditional, risky loans that ultimately led to a financial crisis.[15] Regarding the AEI paper, Phil Angelides, chairman of the FCIC, has stated: "The source for this newfound wisdom [is] shopworn data, produced by a consultant to the corporate-funded American Enterprise Institute, which was analyzed and debunked by the FCIC Report."

      I.e. the AEI guy criticized both the Democrat majority and the Republicans for ignoring things like the effect the CRA had, not just on Fanny and Freddy loans but to all loans as the whole industry's loans.

      And he was right. Look at the bit I quoted. Both the Democrats under Clinton and Republicans under Bush pushed for 'affordable housing' which meant 'lending money to people the banks wouldn't lend money too.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Several administrations, both Democratic and Republican, advocated affordable housing policies in the years leading up to the crisis. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 established, for the first time, an affordable housing loan purchase mandate for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a mandate to be regulated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Initially, the 1992 legislation required that 30 percent or more of Fannie's and Freddie's loan purchases be related to affordable housing. However, HUD was given the power to set future requirements. During the later part of the Clinton Administration, HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced "new regulations to provide $2.4 trillion in mortgages for affordable housing for 28.1 million families, which increased the required percentage of mortgage loans for low- and moderate-income famili

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  14. Re: Bitcoin? No. Tulip bulbs for big profit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I guarantee that a year from now tulip bulbs will be up,to 20,000 and can only go higher from there!

    Get your bulb orders in now before it's too late and you miss out on the investment of a lifetime!

  15. Re: Bitcoin? No. Tulip bulbs for big profit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Get your [bitcoin] orders in now before it's too late and you miss out on the investment of a lifetime!

    Yup exactly. Had you bought $10,000 worth of BC in January you'd be looking at around $160,000 now. Sell $100,000 to lock your profit in and you've increased your investment 10 fold and still have a significant BC holding in case it goes even higher. How was that not the investment opportunity of your lifetime. But all you did was moan "this is tulip bulbs." Too clever by half, loser.

    Anyway, all the smart money is moving to block-chain collectables. Capitalism ... don't you just love it?

  16. Not really by Interfacer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Plenty of coin are scams or 'get rich quick' schemes that sponsor the developers of a crypto project. But scarcity is still assured because while there can be infinite coins, most of them are coins that people don't want, or want badly enough.

    Bitcoin will always be scarce. Having some schmuck mint another billion Doge coins on a whim is not going to affect scarcity at all because those are pretty much the equivalent of monopoly money compared to Euros or Dollars.

    1. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't mint another billion Doge coins, just like you can't mint another billion bitcoins. Or maybe you can if you break something. OPs point missed you: bitcoin isn't special, it was just the first. It's actually worse than many of the new proposals.

  17. Welcome to Jita Local by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    13-fold return on something called Plex? Sounds like I'm in Jita again.

    1. Re:Welcome to Jita Local by Maritz · · Score: 1

      I logged on when they made it 'free' out of curiosity having not been on for years and years.

      Couldn't fly any of my ships. Logged off again.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  18. DIY Cryptocurrency Mining... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want mine your own crypto currency, you need a motherboard with 19 PCIe 1X slots to plug in 19 GPUs and a couple of 1200W PSUs.

  19. So - who fears an alternate currency most? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who fears this the most? Imo @ least, the FED (not federal @ all reserve central banks & their fiat nothing behind it currency + the treasury dept. that took the GOLD OUT OF Fort Knox (what's safer than that place?) saying "We took it for 'safe keeping'" & that was after Congressmen like Ron Paul were turned away from an audit of Ft. Knox's gold WHICH THEY ARE ENTITLED TO PERFORM!).

    * Know your enemies folks...

    APK

    P.S.=> ... & unfortunately? That ENEMY IS US (not the USA, but the central bankers who masquerade AS part of the U.S. Gov't. & don't even TRY tell me "The FED can't be removed, it can't be done" well, bullshit - Lincoln & Jackson did so & RIGHT THE ECONOMY almost IMMEDIATELY doing so (& the FED is trying to "f'up" President Trump's so far EXCELLENT economic recovery by RAISING INTEREST RATES to stall that upsurge by making loans more expensive))... apk