We are building the next generation platform to support various Internet of Things (IoT) devices

Danale

SEC v. Terraform Court Filing, retrieved on February 16, 2023, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 28 of 38. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here a. Terraform and Kwon Deceived Investors about Chai 121. Terraform and Kwon marketed the Terraform blockchain as having a real-world use. Specifically, Terraform and Kwon repeatedly claimed that a Korean company, Chai Corporation ("Chai"), used the Terraform blockchain to process and settle millions of transactions for Korean consumers at retail establishments, such as online stores, movie theaters, and convenience stores. These statements were materially false and misleading. Chai transactions were neither processed nor settled on the Terraform blockchain. 122. To further deceive investors, Terraform and Kwon recorded completed Chai transactions onto the Terraform blockchain to make it appear as if they were processed on the blockchain when, in fact, they were not. The purported "real-world use" of the Terraform blockchain was a literal fabrication. 123. Chai is a mobile payment service provider in Korea, similar to PayPal or Venmo, which Kwon launched, together with Terraform's co-founder, in or around June 2019. 124. Until early 2020, Chai and Terraform were closely associated with each other, sharing an office space and overlapping personnel. During that time, Kwon sat on Chai's board of directors and was kept up to date on Chai activities. 125. Sometime in early 2020, Kwon and Terraform's co-founder took steps to separate Terraform's business from Chai. Kwon took control of Terraform and moved its offices to a new location. At the same time, the majority of Terraform's employees began working solely for Terraform. However, until approximately May 2022, Kwon continued to sit on Chai's board and Defendants continued to represent publicly that Terraform was connected to Chai. 126. From mid-2019 through at least March 2022, Defendants made numerous and repeated statements falsely representing that the "backend" of Chai transactions were being processed and settled using the Terraform blockchain. Terraform and Kwon also falsely stated that Chai's use of the Terraform blockchain provided incentives to both Korean merchants and consumers to use Chai for their transactions. Specifically, Terraform and Kwon claimed that Chai's use of the Terraform blockchain meant that merchants experienced faster processing times and lower transaction fees through Chai than through competitor mobile payment services providers. Likewise, Terraform and Kwon maintained that Chai customers would benefit from additional consumer discounts flowing from the lower costs associated with Chai's purported use of the Terraform blockchain. With these misrepresentations, Terraform and Kwon misleadingly used Chai's growth as a proxy for the growth and success of the Terraform ecosystem as a whole. 127. Terraform and Kwon made these false and misleading statements in presentations to solicit investments in Terraform's crypto asset securities, including LUNA, from investors and prospective investors in the U.S. and overseas. In addition, Terraform made and disseminated these false and misleading statements in public interviews, Terraform-sponsored podcasts, and social media posts, which were available to U.S. investors and prospective investors. 128. For instance, in a presentation aired on CNBC Africa that Terraform made available to U.S. investors when it posted it to YouTube on October 14, 2019, Kwon discussed Chai in depth, explaining: [I]n the backend, it uses Terra's blockchain technology to solve some major pain points and problems for the merchants. But in the backend is where the real magic starts to happen. And I contend that Terra solves two of the biggest roadblocks to the adoption of digital payments in Asia and the rest of the world. So the first is slow settlement periods. … Terra settles in six seconds. So every block for every transaction that has been made, we batch it up and then send it to the merchant so they can have easy and early access to working capital should they choose to do so. The second problem that we solve is high transaction fees. … So in the thirteen weeks in which we have been operational, early response has been quite explosive. Up-up to today we have had 430,000 shoppers over the Chai gateway, and most of them coming in the last month. And we've processed nearly 2,000,000 transactions up to date. And we think that this number will continue to grow. In terms of daily active users, Terra and Chai has already surpassed some of the most popular tokens. Our daily active user numbers today currently stand at around 58,000 users... … So, basically what we are going for is to facilitate everyday retail transactions that are powered by Terra. 129. In an email sent on February 6, 2020 directly to investors, including U.S.-based institutional investors, Kwon noted that Similarly, on February 9, 2020, Kwon wrote in the Terra General Discord Channel chat accessible to the public that "Chai sits at 1.18 million active accounts today, and we passed the IM mark on Jan 14" "[r]ight now Chai has 12 merchants, all of whom get settled in KRT on the Terraform blockchain." 130. Terraform provided a September 2020 investor slide deck to at least one U.S.- based institutional investor, in which it touted the purported speed and efficiency of Chai in using the Terraform blockchain to process transactions. One slide titled contained a chart of various crypto assets and associated that $16 million with "LUNA, Terra's Native Token." "Explosive adoption of payment solutions has generated Terra 16M in annualized fees" Later slides in the deck also touted Chai's success in promoting the investment opportunities of other Terraform crypto asset securities. 131. In a series of Tweets posted on May 24, 2021 through @terra_money, Terraform again emphasized Chai's use of the Terraform blockchain and highlighted its growth, stating: 17/ As long as we create useful applications that people use on top of Terra, the strong locus of demand will always exist. 18/ And the use cases are already there. CHAI has more than 2 million active users in Korea. 132. And on March 31, 2022, in an interview posted to the public YouTube channel Blockworks Macro, Kwon again touted Chai and its use of the Terraform blockchain: So, we've launched apps like Chai in Korea. And so, the idea was that we were close to retail loop with things that people can buy, and transact with using, you know, Terra payments. So, you could take it to most e-commerce merchants of your choice. I could go to movie theaters, convenience stores, and things like that. 133. In addition to making and disseminating these materially false and misleading statements, Terraform and Kwon engaged in other deceptive acts, including by entering transactions on the Terraform blockchain using "KRT" (yet another algorithmic stablecoin offered by Terraform that was pegged to Korean currency, Won), which purported to reflect Chai commercial transactions. Specifically, from June 2019 through at least May 12, 2022, the Terraform blockchain appeared to reflect that Chai transactions were being settled on the blockchain in KRT, when, in fact, Chai payments were processed in Korean Won. 134. To carry out this deception, Terraform programmed a server, which was referred to internally as the "LP Server," to receive and process data about Chai transactions, and then issue instructions to the Terraform blockchain to replicate those transactions as if they had originally "settled" on the Terraform blockchain. 135. Analysis of Terraform blockchain data reflects that, in replicating the Chai transactions, Terraform used one wallet address ("Terraform Master Wallet") to fund up to 2.7 million other wallets. Terraform controlled each of these wallets and used them to execute batched or "multisend" transfers that would replicate multiple Chai transactions together in a single transaction, using data received by the LP Server. Analysis of Terraform blockchain data further reflects that Terraform used the Terraform Master Wallet to begin each batch of transactions that replicated the real transactions that Chai was processing in Korean Won. 136. In statements to investors, Kwon has confirmed that the batched blockchain transactions that utilized this Terraform Master Wallet were purportedly connected to Chai (though he did not disclose that they merely replicated Chai transactions, which were not actually settled on the blockchain). For instance, in a private Discord chat on June 22, 2019, Kwon told a small number of investors that Terraform blockchain transactions that are "multisend [are] pretty much all Chai." 137. To further his deception, Kwon "challenged" his Twitter followers to identify purported merchant wallet addresses from these replicated blockchain transactions. Specifically, in a February 8, 2020 tweet posted through @stablekwon, Kwon challenged his followers to identify Chai merchant wallet addresses from the blockchain, posting: Fun thought: currently @terra_money payments app Chai is linked with 12 merchants in Korea. Can anyone guess which wallet address belongs to which merchant? First person to respond with the correct guess and explain reasoning get 5000 SLUNA. 138. At least one of Kwon's Twitter followers purportedly accepted the challenge and searched the Terraform blockchain to match the follower's real-world Chai app payments with transactions recorded on the blockchain. As a result, the follower claimed to have discovered eleven of the twelve purported merchant wallet addresses. 139. On February 9, 2020, Kwon posted a follow-up tweet falsely stating that the follower had correctly identified the Chai merchant wallets. In fact, a blockchain analysis reveals that each identified transaction began with the Terraform Master Wallet and the purportedly identified merchant wallet addresses were controlled by Terraform. 140. These Terraform blockchain transactions purporting to represent real Chai transactions were purely sham transactions. An analysis of the blockchain indicates that virtually all the KRT used to fund the Terraform Master Wallet originated from other Terraform-controlled wallets, including a reserve of Terraform stablecoins, called Terraform SDR (SDT) Similarly, virtually all the KRT used to replicate these Chai transactions remained in or was returned to Terraform-controlled wallets through at least May 12, 2022. The analysis further reflects that, from June 2019 until at least May 2022, with very few exceptions, the wallet addresses used in Terraform Master Wallet transactions were used in no other transactions oth than those initiated from the Terraform Master Wallet. In other words, these blockchain transactions do not reflect real-world, arms-length transfers of KRT between consumers and merchants. Instead, they reflect a closed system in which Terraform transferred KRT between millions of wallets that it controlled in order to replicate millions of transactions processed through Chai to make it appear that they had been processed and settled on the Terraform blockchain. 141. In reality, Chai did not process or settle transactions on the Terraform blockcha but instead used traditional payment methods of receiving Korean Won from its customers and paying Korean Won to participating merchants. Neither Chai consumers nor Chai merchants were transacting in KRT. The transactions that were executed by the LP Server on the Terraform blockchain merely recorded transactions that had already happened in the real work using Korean Won. 142. Breaks in the continuity of new blocks created on the Terraform blockchain confirm that no Chai transactions occurred on the blockchain. The Terraform blockchain typically creates new blocks reflecting new states of the blockchain (including transactions) every six or so seconds. However, in at least five instances between October 2021 and March 2022, there were one or more days when no transactions whatsoever were confirmed on the Terraform blockchain. Yet, there is no evidence that the Chai payment application was not functioning during those periods. 143. Chai itself has denied in emails to its own investors that it used a blockchain to process its payments and claimed that doing so would not have been legally permitted in Korea. 144. Terraform employees that knew of the deception also knew to maintain its secrecy. For example, one Terraform employee explained in a chat with another employee on October 9, 2021,"btw we don't want to say stuff about LP server too much... it breaks the perception that chai depends on Terra... Basically chai doesn't need Terra to work... It's what copies chai's transactions from their data base to create tx activity." 145. As a founder and former director of Chai, Kwon (and through Kwon, Terraform) knew or were reckless in not knowing that Chai did not actually process or settle transactions on the Terraform blockchain. Kwon personally wrote much of the Terraform blockchain code from its genesis through two version upgrades and was primarily responsible for Terraform's coding and engineering strategy decisions. At the time of Chai's development and launch, Kwon held the most senior technical position at Terraform. 146. Kwon knew or was reckless in not knowing that the LP Server was merely replicating Chai transaction data that had not actually occurred on the Terraform blockchain because Kwon directly supervised and instructed the Terraform employees who programmed the LP Server in the first instance. Kwon also participated in technical discussions that required an understanding of how Chai transactions were reflected on the Terraform blockchain, including that they were batched in "multisend" transactions, and demonstrated knowledge of the location of Chai-related files in Terraform's code repositories. Kwon further demonstrated his understanding of the Chai transaction replication process by publicly confirming Terraform blockchain wallet addresses that purportedly belonged to Chai merchants. 147. Defendants' misleading statements and omissions, and their deceptive acts, with respect to the non-existent Chai transactions, were material to investors in Terraform's crypto assets securities. 148. Terraform and Kwon used these material misrepresentations about Chai to encourage and solicit investments by retail and institutional investors in Terraform crypto assets, including LUNA and wLUNA. For example, in a June 19, 2020 blog post on Terraform's Medium website, Terraform's Head of Ecosystem Development directly tied Chai's purported use of the Terraform blockchain to the returns to Terraform investors, writing: In this piece we'd like to go beyond the numbers to reflect on the key role that transaction fees play in determining network value and security. The fundamental driver of transaction fees in the Terra network is the broad adoption of CHAI by consumers and merchants. 149. Defendants' efforts worked. U.S.-based retail and institutional investors believed that Chai operated on the Terraform blockchain and found it significant in deciding to invest in Terraform crypto assets, including LUNA. For example, on December 3, 2020, the CEO of a U.S. based institutional investor posted to Twitter: "Terra's payment app Chai is up to 80k daily active users. Koreans are fast adopters. Watch this grow. $LUNA." On May 18, 2022, that same CEO posted a memo to Twitter purporting to explain the basis for investing in LUNA. In the memo, the CEO highlighted as one significant factor, Chai's use of the Terra blockchain, describing it as "crypto finding a real-world use case." 150. Similarly, in or around November 2021, Kwon and another Terraform employee approached another U.S.-based institutional investor to solicit that investor to purchase LUNA tokens. In pitching the LUNA investment, Terraform and Kwon told the investor that the Terraform blockchain was being used to process Chai transactions. The investor found this fact to be significant in deciding to invest with Terraform. This investor specifically highlighted Chai's purported transactions on the Terraform blockchain in the investor's internal investment memorandum in early January 2022. On or about January 24, 2022, that investor (through a foreign subsidiary) signed an agreement to purchase $57 million in LUNA tokens. 151. From December 27, 2019, to March 10, 2022, U.S.-based institutional investors (either directly or through offshore affiliates) purchased approximately $656 million of LUNA tokens from Terraform (or a wholly-controlled subsidiary). These institutional investors included hedge funds and venture capitalists based in California, New York, Massachusetts, Florida, and Washington D.C. Similarly, from September 2021 through May 2022, retail investors, including investors in the U.S., purchased billions of dollars of LUNA and wLUNA on crypto asset trading platforms. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 1:23-cv-01346 retrieved on September 12, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. sec.gov

Do Kwon Lied to Investors About Chai: How He Dangled the Carrot In Front of Their Faces

At the beginning of January 2021, Bitcoin set a new record-breaking price point, surpassing the $42,000 mark. Many experts believe that this is still far from the limit. For instance, the investor and co-founder of Fundstrat Global Advisors said that by the end of the year, the price of Bitcoin could reach $100,000. The Winklevoss brothers predicted that the cryptocurrency would grow to up to $500,000 in value in the next five years. Russian experts have been more restrained in their forecasts, but don't deny that the price of Bitcoin will go up. "How much could Bitcoin be worth, and is it worth investing in this asset?" is the main interview topic with Anti Danilevski, CEO of the KickEX Cryptocurrency Exchange. Anti, Bitcoin is recognized as the most profitable asset of the last 12 years. The price of Bitcoin went up and down constantly. What can we expect from BTC in the near future? A.D.: One of the most popular phrases in trading is "history repeats itself". We are currently watching the situation that occurred at the end of 2017 repeat itself, when Bitcoin demonstrated another cycle of rapid growth after updating its historical highs. At that moment, the search queries on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency were off the charts; various celebrities were commenting on their investments in cryptocurrency, and novice investors were looking for options to invest their fiat money into cryptocurrency in the best possible way. Along with the rise in the price of Bitcoin in early January, the volatility of the cryptocurrency has increased sharply. How will this affect the market? A.D.: Of course, the rise in price of Bitcoin has brought with it the volatility of the market, which may eventually lead to a slight pullback in value. This is, however, quite normal for the cryptocurrency market. Again, it is worth paying attention to the history of market development: a growth has always been followed by a fall, and then a rapid growth again. Currently, we're seeing another growth cycle by Bitcoin that has pleased cryptocurrency investors. The BTC price began its growth back in October and after a brief consolidation near its historical high of $20,000, it grew, reaching $29,000 by the end of the year. Since the beginning of the year, the price of BTC has continued to grow and is currently trading in a range where the upper boundary is a new high of $42,000 and the lower of $30,000. What will happen in the near future with the rate? When can we expect the lows? A.D.: If we look at the past history and analyze the previous growth cycles, we can assume that there is a certain pattern that can be used to estimate BTC's growth potential. Looking far into the past, when BTC was at about $13 and the active growth phase began, we see the approximate growth from the previous historical maximum to the new one at around 9000%. Then, following the next historical high of $1,100, BTC reached $20,000, about 1,500%, which is 6 times less than the last time. At this point, given that the cryptocurrency and BTC market is moving to a more mature stage, as evidenced by the volume of trading and the number of participants, we can assume the nearest potential growth, after the renewed historical high of 250%, which in price terms will come out to be $65,000 per BTC. What are the main factors that have influenced the new huge surge in people's interest in cryptocurrency? How will it affect fiat currencies? A.D.: One of the main factors that had a significant impact on the price of BTC and the cryptocurrency market was the COVID-19 epidemic. After the panic sale of cryptocurrencies in March, the most farsighted investors quickly realized that the pandemic would have a negative impact on the real sectors of global economies that operate offline, and they began to build cryptocurrency portfolios. To support their economies, governments began to expand stimulus programs and make additional issues of fiat currency, particularly the U.S., which also allowed Bitcoin to gain value. Many institutional and large investors decided to play on this and buy a significant part of the BTC supply from the market, including Grayscale Investments (about 600,000 BTC), MicroStrategy (70,470 BTC), Ruffer Investments (45,000 BTC) and Square (4,709 BTC). In addition, the unstable political situation in the U.S, where a change in president is accompanied by nervousness across the country, helps Bitcoin grow. This, in turn, increases the risks of investing in the U.S. stock market. But in the given case, many investors' appetite for risk and yield remains, especially when they see another BTC bull run. Admittedly, many of them have not yet decided to invest because for many hedge funds, the volatility of BTC is too risky. Take BTC's 27% correction after the $42,000 level test, for example. But the longer the cryptocurrency market exists, the more participants come to it and thus trading volumes increase, making it more efficient. As for fiat currencies, cryptocurrencies are developing in parallel and so far cannot have a serious negative impact on them. On the contrary, we see that after the rapid growth in popularity of cryptocurrencies, governments began to impose restrictions on the use of digital currencies. For example, the U.S. and the U.K. are already developing rules to regulate the circulation of stable-coins. Russia prohibits the use of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment. Here, I tend to think that the crypto market will grow as long as it doesn't have a serious impact on the global economy. As soon as governments feel threatened by Bitcoin and other coins for their national currency and their country's economy, every measure will be taken to limit the circulation of digital currencies. Is it worth investing in Bitcoin today? A.D.: It's important to understand that investing in cryptocurrencies involves risk, because the price is highly volatile. To protect yourself from unnecessary losses, it's important to approach investing thoughtfully and build a portfolio of cryptocurrencies, gradually gaining positions in different instruments. It's worth noting that after this rally, Bitcoin is in the top 10 global ranking of assets by capitalization, next to the stocks of companies such as Apple, Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft and others. But Bitcoin is not a stock and the potential for its distribution and use is much higher because BTC is also a means of payment that is gaining in popularity. An important point is that central banks in many countries are already actively adopting blockchain technology and testing the issuance of their digital currencies, which could significantly expand the scope and popularity of cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin can be purchased on both our platform and on P2P platforms. However, it is worth keeping the security of transactions in mind. In addition, I would recommend constantly improving your knowledge about this asset, as new technologies come to the cryptocurrency market almost daily. KickEX exchange For example, on our — — we have compiled an entire collection of educational articles. You can also find educational materials on other open sources. academy website KickAcademy What's important is to have a desire to learn and embrace new knowledge.

“Bitcoin is going to hit $65,000, and it's going to hit it very soon,” - Anti Danilevski

Part 1: Odell vs Saylor It was only last week, exact date and time unknown given how well-protected is the individual data. A Nostr client and Cypherpunk going by ODELL, unleashed a seething post from the depths of his Post Office. The post started by saying it was not controversial, in capital letters. Then proceeded to say something controversial. This, in addition to other, capital-lettered posts. In brief, Odell claims that Michael Saylor, a prominent Bitcoin whale and renowned hodler, is against the funding of Bitcoin developers. Let Bitcoin “ossify”, believes Saylor (says people on his side). So the code can become something so usual humans sing it in an anthem. Like, unchanged. *** Meanwhile, Mr. Saylor hasn't said anything to either deny or verify the aforementioned claims nee sayings in his name. The Advantage of Not Funding Bitcoin Developers Aside from the snide remarks and memes on X comparing BTC Devs to busybodies, the biggest threat of the ‘Dev Funding Race’, goes the argument, is that it incentivizes fiat overlords to bulldoze Bitcoin into the shape and form that they want. Masked as “maintenance” and “upgrades”, perpetual changes to Bitcoin's code could leave vulnerabilities. Currently, Bitcoin is still struggling, and the price won't stop dancing around $69k. It is barely a trillion-dollar asset. Meanwhile, the fiat world boasts hundreds of trillions of dollars, and Bitcoin ETF companies alone are bench-pressing north of 100 billion dollars. And they want to dangle all those carrots in front of our developers. Evil. But it might be true. Jack Dorsey mentioned names. Bitcoin developers have lived for years like the Fremen of Dune. Modestly quenching their financial thirst with drops of donated water-satoshis. Recycling each sat they get their hands on while leveraging more circularity than a hamster on a new wheel. Yes, while we all reap the benefits. Now, the promise of big money raining down on their well-honed skills is a big threat to the core code. Like lawyers, they are itching to change the Constitution. But hey, what is a developer who does not develop new tools? The devs in the wider cryptocurrency community must be cracking their ribs with laughter. And counting their lucky altcoins, grateful for the fact that they can buidl. A Developer Shall Develop. What do you call a developer who does not develop on a whim? A Watcher. A Waiter. Waiting for the call to help. Like a Lone Ranger in a Western. But that is painfully lonely. And sounds segregative af if we enforce it on other people. Honestly? Developing is a form of free speech. So no one can actually stop developers from speaking their speech. Go ahead, develop. It is the highest form of individual autonomy known to humans in this digital age. Paid or Not paid. For if you can develop, you can maintain your digital privacy (which is just privacy), maximum autonomy, and making a few bucks for people who want features isn't too bad either. Win-win-win. I dare say, if we could all develop (We cannot. It is a vocation some of us shall only inch towards. Slowly), this would not even be an issue. It would be strange for Saylor, anybody, to even suggest that Bitcoin developers try not to develop too much. However, Bitcoin being what it is, a global community project of extreme importance, actually constrains hacker ethos so much there won't be any cypherpunks like the pre-Bitcoin OGs. Forget flipping it to centralized systems anymore by engineering some arcane codex. Now, it is a game of sitting and waiting and watching. Praying that the price stops dancing around $69k. Saylor and his crew imply that the price of freedom is to follow the majority. And the majority says just sit, wait, and watch. But do they? The conversation is still evolving. Here is more data so that you have an informed opinion. How Odell and His Crew Are Right Here is a listicle of all the good points supporting Mr. Odell and his band of merry devs. The First Bitcoiner was a Bitcoin Developer. He was called Satoshi Nakamoto. You might have heard of him. 2. The Last Bitcoiner will be a Bitcoin Developer. When the Bitcoin is finally dead (a nuclear holocaust will end it), only a developer listening for its faint signals in the cold dark nuclear winter shall help keep the flame of freedom alive. 3. When in doubt, we ask Bitcoin Developers. Don't know why Michael Saylor is so confident that the US government cannot hack his bitcoins? Ask a Bitcoin Developer. 4. Developer Wars birth great stuff. Like the Lightning Network. Once Upon a Time, Bitcoin Developers fought for 2 bitter years over how much storage space should be held by Bitcoin. In the end, they doubled the storage space from 1MB to 2MB, invented Segwit which kept fees very low for a long time, and work on Segwit helped birth the Lightning Network. When developers fight, good things happen. When politicians fight, … 5. If ETF people want arcane-looking wallets with features from the year 3000, they have a right to pay for them. I think the key problem in this battle between Odell and Saylor is the fear that deep-pocket ETF funds may corrupt most Bitcoin developers. Otherwise, Bitcoin developers have been funded forever, and no one has been complaining. Indeed, Ark Invest should tell us what they need to pay OG Bitcoin developers some eye-popping sums of money for. If they want features, they could pay this to anybody else who is into UI. Bitcoin core devs are OUR lawyers, and they unravel weird shit like weird fee hikes and why LN nodes need a balance before any money can be received at all from other nodes. Bullshit. OG Bitcoin core devs have a right to build what they want and that does not mean they are corrupt. If a job developing UIs pays more than one developing arcane zk proofs, I'm taking the UI job. Let's not put evil intent into people's praxeologic actions. Give Ark and Bitcoin devs a chance. Then judge them when they mess shit up. Coz it could be magic. It can always be unmessed up. It is software, and we have all the commits in the GitHub repo. (It is not the same as giving Ark your money. That is on you. DYOR). Basically, let's all have some balls and break some dev rules. 6. ETFs paying Developers does not mean we shall be bought as well. Point 5 above feels like if the OG Bitcoiner developers are bought, doom and gloom for the rest of us non-dev plebs. But I assure you, if Bitcoin drops its 21 million coin supply cap for any reason, I will not follow it. That will not be Bitcoin but some silly hard fork. Call it BFD - Bitcoin For Devs. It will be worth exactly 0 US dollars after a few days. 7. Developing is greater speech than English. Last for today, but certainly not least. We should all aim to be Bitcoin developers, AI developers, Quantum Developers, and Math gurus creating an alternative universe free from the greed and psyop pervasive in this universe. But on the same planet earth. Orthogonal to this one in cyberspace. Bitcoin has done it for money. But planting a seed and watering it are two different things. And it will start by paying devs and supporting the right to pay devs. 100 years from today, Bitcoin should look like it is 100 years from today. Developing is how that happens. If developers break something we can always cancel them on X. Then unbreak it back. Part 1: Odell vs Saylor It was only last week, exact date and time unknown given how well-protected is the individual data. A Nostr client and Cypherpunk going by ODELL, unleashed a seething post from the depths of his Post Office. The post started by saying it was not controversial, in capital letters. Then proceeded to say something controversial. This, in addition to other, capital-lettered posts. In brief, Odell claims that Michael Saylor, a prominent Bitcoin whale and renowned hodler, is against the funding of Bitcoin developers. Let Bitcoin “ossify”, believes Saylor (says people on his side). So the code can become something so usual humans sing it in an anthem. Like, unchanged . unchanged *** Meanwhile, Mr. Saylor hasn't said anything to either deny or verify the aforementioned claims nee sayings in his name. The Advantage of Not Funding Bitcoin Developers Aside from the snide remarks and memes on X comparing BTC Devs to busybodies, the biggest threat of the ‘Dev Funding Race’, goes the argument, is that it incentivizes fiat overlords to bulldoze Bitcoin into the shape and form that they want. Masked as “maintenance” and “upgrades”, perpetual changes to Bitcoin's code could leave vulnerabilities. Currently, Bitcoin is still struggling, and the price won't stop dancing around $69k. It is barely a trillion-dollar asset. Meanwhile, the fiat world boasts hundreds of trillions of dollars, and Bitcoin ETF companies alone are bench-pressing north of 100 billion dollars. And they want to dangle all those carrots in front of our developers. Evil. But it might be true. Jack Dorsey mentioned names. Bitcoin developers have lived for years like the Fremen of Dune. Modestly quenching their financial thirst with drops of donated water-satoshis. Recycling each sat they get their hands on while leveraging more circularity than a hamster on a new wheel. Yes, while we all reap the benefits. Now, the promise of big money raining down on their well-honed skills is a big threat to the core code. Like lawyers, they are itching to change the Constitution. But hey, what is a developer who does not develop new tools? The devs in the wider cryptocurrency community must be cracking their ribs with laughter. And counting their lucky altcoins, grateful for the fact that they can buidl. A Developer Shall Develop. What do you call a developer who does not develop on a whim? A Watcher. A Waiter. Waiting for the call to help. Like a Lone Ranger in a Western. But that is painfully lonely. And sounds segregative af if we enforce it on other people. Honestly? Developing is a form of free speech. So no one can actually stop developers from speaking their speech. Go ahead, develop. It is the highest form of individual autonomy known to humans in this digital age. Paid or Not paid. For if you can develop, you can maintain your digital privacy (which is just privacy), maximum autonomy, and making a few bucks for people who want features isn't too bad either. Win-win-win. I dare say, if we could all develop (We cannot. It is a vocation some of us shall only inch towards. Slowly), this would not even be an issue. It would be strange for Saylor, anybody, to even suggest that Bitcoin developers try not to develop too much. However, Bitcoin being what it is, a global community project of extreme importance, actually constrains hacker ethos so much there won't be any cypherpunks like the pre-Bitcoin OGs. Forget flipping it to centralized systems anymore by engineering some arcane codex. Now, it is a game of sitting and waiting and watching. Praying that the price stops dancing around $69k. Saylor and his crew imply that the price of freedom is to follow the majority. And the majority says just sit, wait, and watch. But do they? The conversation is still evolving. Here is more data so that you have an informed opinion. How Odell and His Crew Are Right Here is a listicle of all the good points supporting Mr. Odell and his band of merry devs. The First Bitcoiner was a Bitcoin Developer. The First Bitcoiner was a Bitcoin Developer. He was called Satoshi Nakamoto. You might have heard of him. 2. The Last Bitcoiner will be a Bitcoin Developer. When the Bitcoin is finally dead (a nuclear holocaust will end it), only a developer listening for its faint signals in the cold dark nuclear winter shall help keep the flame of freedom alive. 3. When in doubt, we ask Bitcoin Developers. Don't know why Michael Saylor is so confident that the US government cannot hack his bitcoins? Ask a Bitcoin Developer. 4. Developer Wars birth great stuff. Like the Lightning Network. Once Upon a Time, Bitcoin Developers fought for 2 bitter years over how much storage space should be held by Bitcoin. In the end, they doubled the storage space from 1MB to 2MB, invented Segwit which kept fees very low for a long time, and work on Segwit helped birth the Lightning Network. When developers fight, good things happen. When politicians fight, … 5. If ETF people want arcane-looking wallets with features from the year 3000, they have a right to pay for them. I think the key problem in this battle between Odell and Saylor is the fear that deep-pocket ETF funds may corrupt most Bitcoin developers. Otherwise, Bitcoin developers have been funded forever, and no one has been complaining. Indeed, Ark Invest should tell us what they need to pay OG Bitcoin developers some eye-popping sums of money for. Ark Invest If they want features, they could pay this to anybody else who is into UI. Bitcoin core devs are OUR lawyers, and they unravel weird shit like weird fee hikes and why LN nodes need a balance before any money can be received at all from other nodes. Bullshit. OG Bitcoin core devs have a right to build what they want and that does not mean they are corrupt. If a job developing UIs pays more than one developing arcane zk proofs, I'm taking the UI job. Let's not put evil intent into people's praxeologic actions. Give Ark and Bitcoin devs a chance. Then judge them when they mess shit up. Coz it could be magic. It can always be unmessed up. It is software, and we have all the commits in the GitHub repo. (It is not the same as giving Ark your money. That is on you. DYOR). Basically, let's all have some balls and break some dev rules. 6. ETFs paying Developers does not mean we shall be bought as well. Point 5 above feels like if the OG Bitcoiner developers are bought, doom and gloom for the rest of us non-dev plebs. But I assure you, if Bitcoin drops its 21 million coin supply cap for any reason, I will not follow it. That will not be Bitcoin but some silly hard fork. Call it BFD - Bitcoin For Devs. It will be worth exactly 0 US dollars after a few days. 7. Developing is greater speech than English. Last for today, but certainly not least. We should all aim to be Bitcoin developers, AI developers, Quantum Developers, and Math gurus creating an alternative universe free from the greed and psyop pervasive in this universe. But on the same planet earth. Orthogonal to this one in cyberspace. Bitcoin has done it for money. But planting a seed and watering it are two different things. And it will start by paying devs and supporting the right to pay devs. 100 years from today, Bitcoin should look like it is 100 years from today. Developing is how that happens. If developers break something we can always cancel them on X. Then unbreak it back.

Odell Vs Saylor - Should Bitcoin Devs Dev?

266 Stories To Learn About Product Development

225 Stories To Learn About Money

76 Stories To Learn About Fintech Trends

Our Problem Statement: A requirement to send a text message in the form of an SMS message to a patient when there is an entry for an appointment scheduled for them and logged into the Google Sheets. Sample data: Step 1: Add a button in the Google sheet Insert -> Drawing Step 2: Create a custom function that can be triggered by clicking on the button. Extensions -> Apps Script Step 3: Code to send SMS for appointments function myFunction() { var sheet = SpreadsheetApp.getActiveSpreadsheet().getSheetByName('appoinments'); ja // 2 dimentional array for sheets data var data = sheet.getDataRange().getValues(); var timeZone = Session.getScriptTimeZone() for (var i = 1; i < data.length; i++) { // condition to send message to whome we have not already sent message and first column is not blank if (data[i][4] != "done" && data[i][0] != "") { var date = Utilities.formatDate(data[i][2], timeZone, 'dd-MM-yyyy') var time = Utilities.formatDate(data[i][3], timeZone, 'h:mm a') var name = data[i][0] var phonenumber = data[i][1] Logger.log("date: "+date) Logger.log("time: "+time) Logger.log("name: "+ name) Logger.log("phonenumber: "+phonenumber) // API to send SMS(Any provider) // Hit api to send sms // var url = `Put your sms provider url here` // var response = UrlFetchApp.fetch(url); // var json = response.getContentText(); // set status to done, so we dont send messages again for same appoinments sheet.getRange(i + 1, 5).setValue('done') } } } Step 4: Run and give permissions. Click on Advance on the bottom left: Click on, “Go to the untitled project.” Click on allow: We can see logs as expected: Now, we can see the status column set to “done.” Step: Attach the function to the button. Click on the button > assign a script > write the name of the function that we just made. Now, add new appointments to the sheet, and keep the appointment status blank. When we click on the send message button, an SMS will be sent, and the status will be updated in the sheet. Share this with anybody you think would benefit from this. Have any suggestions or questions? Feel free to message me on . LinkedIn Originally Written by Riddhesh Ganatra on Medium.com

DANALE

danale.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

DANALE

EVERGREEN INDEX #3147

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Danale WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

DANALE

danale.com

-- employees

Since n.d.

COMPANY RANKING

DANALE

EVERGREEN INDEX #3147

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT DANALE

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

Danale WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!