18 Burst results for "Van Valkenburgh"

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Let's Talk Bitcoin!

07:47 min | 3 weeks ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

"Of democracy as the world turns and the by the administration gets going one regulatory holdover from the trump era is drawing a lot of attention. Is this the end. Probably not but we'll get into it. I'm to be levin and this is speaking of bitcoin for today's session. I'm joined by the other host of the show. Stephanie murphy andreas m and opelousas alot. Jonathan moham- and special returning guests. Peter van valkenburgh director of research at point center. Peter yes thanks for being here today. Yeah thanks for having me so thanks to all of our hosts and you the listeners. For sitting in on today's session. So peter i've been hearing a lot about the fincen comment period over this self custody wallet ruling that they will be making soon and a lot of people seem to be up at arms and quite a lot happening in the world right now both with the election. The bitcoin price and the lockdown so just winter in general such that. You know it's kind of hard to find oneself to care about anything especially when it's something that seems so banal as the government is asking for comments because later they might say something you might not like just in the realm of all the things that could happen and potentials that are occurring. It just seems so far off and distant. And i know that a lot of the people who are really looking into the such as yourself are really passionate about engaging on this problem so that we get the best outcome what is going on right now and why should we be concerned so you know. A lot of people are upset. I think you know first of all because this all happened over the holidays. We got an announcement from fincen. The friday before christmas and december that there was going to be a fifteen day comment period as you said for a proposed new rule that would affect bitcoin. Exchanges crypto currency exchanges in a pretty serious way. and so fincen. Is this agency in the treasury. That deals with financial surveillance. They do with so-called anti money laundering policy. But i prefer the term financial surveillance because it's really just warrantless data collection about all your financial transactions. That's the law that they deal with the bank. Secrecy act and so this comment period was to solicit public feedback in all fifteen days over the holidays and the new year's on this proposed rule change which would say hey. You're fewer crypto exchange if you got customers and you're holding bitcoin for them or other cryptocurrencies. You're already subject to the bank secrecy. Actually you already know your customers. You already file suspicious activity reports. But we're going to require some new reporting requirements and some new record keeping requirements about your customers some of which that apply to other financial institutions like kind of reports and records that banks need to keep but some of which are actually more strict more information that we want you to collect than we even require from banks and there's one particular requirement that they were proposing in that rulemaking. That basically would be very very difficult for exchanges to be able to meet and so it would lead to exchanges effectively choosing probably not to transact in certain ways because what that requirement was was this it says if your customer is starting transaction or receiving a transaction on say the bitcoin network or any other crypto currency you need to know that transactions either coming from another financial institution like crack into coin base or going to another financial institution coins to crack. And if it's not you need to know the name and physical address of the individual that it's coming or going to so we're talking just a regular old. Bitcoin wallet that i might have on ledger or tresor or something like that or just on an iphone touch if i'm sending transactions from that wallet to coin base coin base would need to know my name physical address. I mean to a customer coin mace personal. I'm actually paying. And you know as i don't need to tell you guys at all. That's not how the bitcoin network works. Bitcoin network has bitcoin addresses. And it has signatures to prove that you are. The you know sort of rightful person to be controlling the funds in those addresses or to control the ut a-x-i-o-s to be more specific so there's no name and physical address field in bitcoin transaction. Right in fact it doesn't even have to be a flesh and blood person receiving the transaction. It could be smart contract in something like that. Exactly the name physical address of any kind of you know payable machine or smart contract on any of these currency networks. So can we just put vitale. Lick taryn one theorem foundation dr. No that doesn't work for all smart smart contracts he's gonna have quite the dossier treasury no so this breaks the way these networks work and you could say well exchanges could just transfer it to your own wallet that you host yourself and then you could go and interact with smart contracts but this is sort of like an added level of complexity to using something like a smart contract or paying an individual. Who's not yourself and it's not just another level of complexity and bad for that reason. It's bad because it's not equal treatment with traditional financial institutions. So when you remove cash from your bank account or even when you send a wire from your bank account the record keeping requirements are flexible. The bank has to record all of the information you gave them about the transaction but there's certain fields like the recipient of the transaction where they only need to record the name and physical address for example if that information is available and so the law makes these excuses if you will for incomplete information at traditional financial institutions like banks. So why would we not get the same excuses at bitcoin financial institutions and. It seems as though there's just wasn't interest in providing that kind of flexibility to the crypto world that there is in the traditional financial world where most of the money laundering actually takes place. But also i mean showing its true colours where customers surveillance or consumer protections comes into play. Seems like the state tends to choose surveillance over consumer protections because as much as we tell everyone to custody their own coins. There's a large percentage of people who are a lot safer with their funds on an exchange and sending it back and forth to regular people and so taking that group of people that don't have any of those best practices and telling them now. Hey the only way for you to send or receive money is for you to self custody your coins and we're gonna see a lot of very unsophisticated. People losing a lot of funds and consumer protections about shielding people from loss consumer protection should also be about protecting their privacies. Some extent right and the minute you start creating these reports and these records of who owns both name and physical address which bitcoin address is the minute you create a fully searchable record of people's four financial history that name physical address information you match it with blockchain analysis and you can see every transaction ever happened like consumer protection is not the point. It's not when it's fincen and that's not really incense fault. Their focus is narrowly as sort of one part of a fragmented government approach to regulation that we have in the us. They're focuses narrowly on financial surveillance so-called market integrity which is a euphemism. I really don't like because markets are just people and markets as a whole can have integrity. That.

Peter van valkenburgh Peter peter Jonathan moham fifteen days december opelousas today fifteen day trump fincen iphone touch both friday before point center Stephanie murphy andreas m one particular requirement Secrecy act first taryn
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Let's Talk Bitcoin!

07:12 min | 3 weeks ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

"All of our hosts and you the listeners. For sitting in on today's session. So peter i've been hearing a lot about the fincen comment period over this self custody wallet ruling that they will be making soon and a lot of people seem to be up at arms and quite a lot happening in the world right now both with the election. The bitcoin price and the lockdown so just winter in general such that. You know it's kind of hard to find oneself to care about anything especially when it's something that seems so banal as the government is asking for comments because later they might say something you might not like just in the realm of all the things that could happen and potentials that are occurring. It just seems so far off and distant. And i know that a lot of the people who are really looking into the such as yourself are really passionate about engaging on this problem so that we get the best outcome what is going on right now and why should we be concerned so you know. A lot of people are upset. I think you know first of all because this all happened over the holidays. We got an announcement from fincen. The friday before christmas and december that there was going to be a fifteen day comment period as you said for a proposed new rule that would affect bitcoin. Exchanges crypto currency exchanges in a pretty serious way. and so fincen. Is this agency in the treasury. That deals with financial surveillance. They do with so-called anti money laundering policy. But i prefer the term financial surveillance because it's really just warrantless data collection about all your financial transactions. That's the law that they deal with the bank. Secrecy act and so this comment period was to solicit public feedback in all fifteen days over the holidays and the new year's on this proposed rule change which would say hey. You're fewer crypto exchange if you got customers and you're holding bitcoin for them or other cryptocurrencies. You're already subject to the bank secrecy. Actually you already know your customers. You already file suspicious activity reports. But we're going to require some new reporting requirements and some new record keeping requirements about your customers some of which that apply to other financial institutions like kind of reports and records that banks need to keep but some of which are actually more strict more information that we want you to collect than we even require from banks and there's one particular requirement that they were proposing in that rulemaking. That basically would be very very difficult for exchanges to be able to meet and so it would lead to exchanges effectively choosing probably not to transact in certain ways because what that requirement was was this it says if your customer is starting transaction or receiving a transaction on say the bitcoin network or any other crypto currency you need to know that transactions either coming from another financial institution like crack into coin base or going to another financial institution coins to crack. And if it's not you need to know the name and physical address of the individual that it's coming or going to so we're talking just a regular old. Bitcoin wallet that i might have on ledger or tresor or something like that or just on an iphone touch if i'm sending transactions from that wallet to coin base coin base would need to know my name physical address. I mean to a customer coin mace personal. I'm actually paying. And you know as i don't need to tell you guys at all. That's not how the bitcoin network works. Bitcoin network has bitcoin addresses. And it has signatures to prove that you are. The you know sort of rightful person to be controlling the funds in those addresses or to control the ut a-x-i-o-s to be more specific so there's no name and physical address field in bitcoin transaction. Right in fact it doesn't even have to be a flesh and blood person receiving the transaction. It could be smart contract in something like that. Exactly the name physical address of any kind of you know payable machine or smart contract on any of these currency networks. So can we just put vitale. Lick taryn one theorem foundation dr. No that doesn't work for all smart smart contracts he's gonna have quite the dossier treasury no so this breaks the way these networks work and you could say well exchanges could just transfer it to your own wallet that you host yourself and then you could go and interact with smart contracts but this is sort of like an added level of complexity to using something like a smart contract or paying an individual. Who's not yourself and it's not just another level of complexity and bad for that reason. It's bad because it's not equal treatment with traditional financial institutions. So when you remove cash from your bank account or even when you send a wire from your bank account the record keeping requirements are flexible. The bank has to record all of the information you gave them about the transaction but there's certain fields like the recipient of the transaction where they only need to record the name and physical address for example if that information is available and so the law makes these excuses if you will for incomplete information at traditional financial institutions like banks. So why would we not get the same excuses at bitcoin financial institutions and. It seems as though there's just wasn't interest in providing that kind of flexibility to the crypto world that there is in the traditional financial world where most of the money laundering actually takes place. But also i mean showing its true colours where customers surveillance or consumer protections comes into play. Seems like the state tends to choose surveillance over consumer protections because as much as we tell everyone to custody their own coins. There's a large percentage of people who are a lot safer with their funds on an exchange and sending it back and forth to regular people and so taking that group of people that don't have any of those best practices and telling them now. Hey the only way for you to send or receive money is for you to self custody your coins and we're gonna see a lot of very unsophisticated. People losing a lot of funds and consumer protections about shielding people from loss consumer protection should also be about protecting their privacies. Some extent right and the minute you start creating these reports and these records of who owns both name and physical address which bitcoin address is the minute you create a fully searchable record of people's four financial history that name physical address information you match it with blockchain analysis and you can see every transaction ever happened like consumer protection is not the point. It's not when it's fincen and that's not really incense fault. Their focus is narrowly as sort of one part of a fragmented government approach to regulation that we have in the us. They're focuses narrowly on financial surveillance so-called market integrity which is a euphemism. I really don't like because markets are just people and markets as a whole can have integrity. That.

iphone fifteen day fifteen days today both december peter one particular requirement friday before fincen first Secrecy act one part bitcoin christmas dr. taryn
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Let's Talk Bitcoin!

06:38 min | 3 weeks ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

"Government is asking for comments because later they might say something you might not like just in the realm of all the things that could happen and potentials that are occurring. It just seems so far off and distant. And i know that a lot of the people who are really looking into the such as yourself are really passionate about engaging on this problem so that we get the best outcome what is going on right now and why should we be concerned so you know. A lot of people are upset. I think you know first of all because this all happened over the holidays. We got an announcement from fincen. The friday before christmas and december that there was going to be a fifteen day comment period as you said for a proposed new rule that would affect bitcoin. Exchanges crypto currency exchanges in a pretty serious way. and so fincen. Is this agency in the treasury. That deals with financial surveillance. They do with so-called anti money laundering policy. But i prefer the term financial surveillance because it's really just warrantless data collection about all your financial transactions. That's the law that they deal with the bank. Secrecy act and so this comment period was to solicit public feedback in all fifteen days over the holidays and the new year's on this proposed rule change which would say hey. You're fewer crypto exchange if you got customers and you're holding bitcoin for them or other cryptocurrencies. You're already subject to the bank secrecy. Actually you already know your customers. You already file suspicious activity reports. But we're going to require some new reporting requirements and some new record keeping requirements about your customers some of which that apply to other financial institutions like kind of reports and records that banks need to keep but some of which are actually more strict more information that we want you to collect than we even require from banks and there's one particular requirement that they were proposing in that rulemaking. That basically would be very very difficult for exchanges to be able to meet and so it would lead to exchanges effectively choosing probably not to transact in certain ways because what that requirement was was this it says if your customer is starting transaction or receiving a transaction on say the bitcoin network or any other crypto currency you need to know that transactions either coming from another financial institution like crack into coin base or going to another financial institution coins to crack. And if it's not you need to know the name and physical address of the individual that it's coming or going to so we're talking just a regular old. Bitcoin wallet that i might have on ledger or tresor or something like that or just on an iphone touch if i'm sending transactions from that wallet to coin base coin base would need to know my name physical address. I mean to a customer coin mace personal. I'm actually paying. And you know as i don't need to tell you guys at all. That's not how the bitcoin network works. Bitcoin network has bitcoin addresses. And it has signatures to prove that you are. The you know sort of rightful person to be controlling the funds in those addresses or to control the ut a-x-i-o-s to be more specific so there's no name and physical address field in bitcoin transaction. Right in fact it doesn't even have to be a flesh and blood person receiving the transaction. It could be smart contract in something like that. Exactly the name physical address of any kind of you know payable machine or smart contract on any of these currency networks. So can we just put vitale. Lick taryn one theorem foundation dr. No that doesn't work for all smart smart contracts he's gonna have quite the dossier treasury no so this breaks the way these networks work and you could say well exchanges could just transfer it to your own wallet that you host yourself and then you could go and interact with smart contracts but this is sort of like an added level of complexity to using something like a smart contract or paying an individual. Who's not yourself and it's not just another level of complexity and bad for that reason. It's bad because it's not equal treatment with traditional financial institutions. So when you remove cash from your bank account or even when you send a wire from your bank account the record keeping requirements are flexible. The bank has to record all of the information you gave them about the transaction but there's certain fields like the recipient of the transaction where they only need to record the name and physical address for example if that information is available and so the law makes these excuses if you will for incomplete information at traditional financial institutions like banks. So why would we not get the same excuses at bitcoin financial institutions and. It seems as though there's just wasn't interest in providing that kind of flexibility to the crypto world that there is in the traditional financial world where most of the money laundering actually takes place. But also i mean showing its true colours where customers surveillance or consumer protections comes into play. Seems like the state tends to choose surveillance over consumer protections because as much as we tell everyone to custody their own coins. There's a large percentage of people who are a lot safer with their funds on an exchange and sending it back and forth to regular people and so taking that group of people that don't have any of those best practices and telling them now. Hey the only way for you to send or receive money is for you to self custody your coins and we're gonna see a lot of very unsophisticated. People losing a lot of funds and consumer protections about shielding people from loss consumer protection should also be about protecting their privacies. Some extent right and the minute you start creating these reports and these records of who owns both name and physical address which bitcoin address is the minute you create a fully searchable record of people's four financial history that name physical address information you match it with blockchain analysis and you can see every transaction ever happened like consumer protection is not the point. It's not when it's fincen and that's not really incense fault. Their focus is narrowly as sort of one part of a fragmented government approach to regulation that we have in the us. They're focuses narrowly on financial surveillance so-called market integrity which is a euphemism. I really don't like because markets are just people and markets as a whole can have integrity. That.

fifteen days fifteen day december Secrecy act fincen both first friday before one part iphone touch one particular requirement A lot of people bitcoin taryn christmas
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

Let's Talk Bitcoin!

06:12 min | 3 weeks ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Let's Talk Bitcoin!

"I've been hearing a lot about the fincen comment period over this self custody wallet ruling that they will be making soon and a lot of people seem to be up at arms and quite a lot happening in the world right now both with the election. The bitcoin price and the lockdown so just winter in general such that. You know it's kind of hard to find oneself to care about anything especially when it's something that seems so banal as the government is asking for comments because later they might say something you might not like just in the realm of all the things that could happen and potentials that are occurring. It just seems so far off and distant. And i know that a lot of the people who are really looking into the such as yourself are really passionate about engaging on this problem so that we get the best outcome what is going on right now and why should we be concerned so you know. A lot of people are upset. I think you know first of all because this all happened over the holidays. We got an announcement from fincen. The friday before christmas and december that there was going to be a fifteen day comment period as you said for a proposed new rule that would affect bitcoin. Exchanges crypto currency exchanges in a pretty serious way. and so fincen. Is this agency in the treasury. That deals with financial surveillance. They do with so-called anti money laundering policy. But i prefer the term financial surveillance because it's really just warrantless data collection about all your financial transactions. That's the law that they deal with the bank. Secrecy act and so this comment period was to solicit public feedback in all fifteen days over the holidays and the new year's on this proposed rule change which would say hey. You're fewer crypto exchange if you got customers and you're holding bitcoin for them or other cryptocurrencies. You're already subject to the bank secrecy. Actually you already know your customers. You already file suspicious activity reports. But we're going to require some new reporting requirements and some new record keeping requirements about your customers some of which that apply to other financial institutions like kind of reports and records that banks need to keep but some of which are actually more strict more information that we want you to collect than we even require from banks and there's one particular requirement that they were proposing in that rulemaking. That basically would be very very difficult for exchanges to be able to meet and so it would lead to exchanges effectively choosing probably not to transact in certain ways because what that requirement was was this it says if your customer is starting transaction or receiving a transaction on say the bitcoin network or any other crypto currency you need to know that transactions either coming from another financial institution like crack into coin base or going to another financial institution coins to crack. And if it's not you need to know the name and physical address of the individual that it's coming or going to so we're talking just a regular old. Bitcoin wallet that i might have on ledger or tresor or something like that or just on an iphone touch if i'm sending transactions from that wallet to coin base coin base would need to know my name physical address. I mean to a customer coin mace personal. I'm actually paying. And you know as i don't need to tell you guys at all. That's not how the bitcoin network works. Bitcoin network has bitcoin addresses. And it has signatures to prove that you are. The you know sort of rightful person to be controlling the funds in those addresses or to control the ut a-x-i-o-s to be more specific so there's no name and physical address field in bitcoin transaction. Right in fact it doesn't even have to be a flesh and blood person receiving the transaction. It could be smart contract in something like that. Exactly the name physical address of any kind of you know payable machine or smart contract on any of these currency networks. So can we just put vitale. Lick taryn one theorem foundation dr. No that doesn't work for all smart smart contracts he's gonna have quite the dossier treasury no so this breaks the way these networks work and you could say well exchanges could just transfer it to your own wallet that you host yourself and then you could go and interact with smart contracts but this is sort of like an added level of complexity to using something like a smart contract or paying an individual. Who's not yourself and it's not just another level of complexity and bad for that reason. It's bad because it's not equal treatment with traditional financial institutions. So when you remove cash from your bank account or even when you send a wire from your bank account the record keeping requirements are flexible. The bank has to record all of the information you gave them about the transaction but there's certain fields like the recipient of the transaction where they only need to record the name and physical address for example if that information is available and so the law makes these excuses if you will for incomplete information at traditional financial institutions like banks. So why would we not get the same excuses at bitcoin financial institutions and. It seems as though there's just wasn't interest in providing that kind of flexibility to the crypto world that there is in the traditional financial world where most of the money laundering actually takes place. But also i mean showing its true colours where customers surveillance or consumer protections comes into play. Seems like the state tends to choose surveillance over consumer protections because as much as we tell everyone to custody their own coins. There's a large percentage of people who are a lot safer with their funds on an exchange and sending it back and forth to regular people and so taking that group of people that don't have any of those best practices and telling them now. Hey the only way for you to send or receive money is for you to self custody your coins and we're gonna see a lot of very unsophisticated. People losing a lot of

Peter van valkenburgh Peter peter Jonathan moham fifteen days december opelousas today fifteen day trump fincen iphone touch both friday before point center Stephanie murphy andreas m one particular requirement Secrecy act first taryn
Looking at FinCEN’s “Self Custodied Wallet” rule with Peter Van Valkenburg‪h‬ from CoinCenter

Let's Talk Bitcoin!

06:12 min | 3 weeks ago

Looking at FinCEN’s “Self Custodied Wallet” rule with Peter Van Valkenburg‪h‬ from CoinCenter

"I've been hearing a lot about the fincen comment period over this self custody wallet ruling that they will be making soon and a lot of people seem to be up at arms and quite a lot happening in the world right now both with the election. The bitcoin price and the lockdown so just winter in general such that. You know it's kind of hard to find oneself to care about anything especially when it's something that seems so banal as the government is asking for comments because later they might say something you might not like just in the realm of all the things that could happen and potentials that are occurring. It just seems so far off and distant. And i know that a lot of the people who are really looking into the such as yourself are really passionate about engaging on this problem so that we get the best outcome what is going on right now and why should we be concerned so you know. A lot of people are upset. I think you know first of all because this all happened over the holidays. We got an announcement from fincen. The friday before christmas and december that there was going to be a fifteen day comment period as you said for a proposed new rule that would affect bitcoin. Exchanges crypto currency exchanges in a pretty serious way. and so fincen. Is this agency in the treasury. That deals with financial surveillance. They do with so-called anti money laundering policy. But i prefer the term financial surveillance because it's really just warrantless data collection about all your financial transactions. That's the law that they deal with the bank. Secrecy act and so this comment period was to solicit public feedback in all fifteen days over the holidays and the new year's on this proposed rule change which would say hey. You're fewer crypto exchange if you got customers and you're holding bitcoin for them or other cryptocurrencies. You're already subject to the bank secrecy. Actually you already know your customers. You already file suspicious activity reports. But we're going to require some new reporting requirements and some new record keeping requirements about your customers some of which that apply to other financial institutions like kind of reports and records that banks need to keep but some of which are actually more strict more information that we want you to collect than we even require from banks and there's one particular requirement that they were proposing in that rulemaking. That basically would be very very difficult for exchanges to be able to meet and so it would lead to exchanges effectively choosing probably not to transact in certain ways because what that requirement was was this it says if your customer is starting transaction or receiving a transaction on say the bitcoin network or any other crypto currency you need to know that transactions either coming from another financial institution like crack into coin base or going to another financial institution coins to crack. And if it's not you need to know the name and physical address of the individual that it's coming or going to so we're talking just a regular old. Bitcoin wallet that i might have on ledger or tresor or something like that or just on an iphone touch if i'm sending transactions from that wallet to coin base coin base would need to know my name physical address. I mean to a customer coin mace personal. I'm actually paying. And you know as i don't need to tell you guys at all. That's not how the bitcoin network works. Bitcoin network has bitcoin addresses. And it has signatures to prove that you are. The you know sort of rightful person to be controlling the funds in those addresses or to control the ut a-x-i-o-s to be more specific so there's no name and physical address field in bitcoin transaction. Right in fact it doesn't even have to be a flesh and blood person receiving the transaction. It could be smart contract in something like that. Exactly the name physical address of any kind of you know payable machine or smart contract on any of these currency networks. So can we just put vitale. Lick taryn one theorem foundation dr. No that doesn't work for all smart smart contracts he's gonna have quite the dossier treasury no so this breaks the way these networks work and you could say well exchanges could just transfer it to your own wallet that you host yourself and then you could go and interact with smart contracts but this is sort of like an added level of complexity to using something like a smart contract or paying an individual. Who's not yourself and it's not just another level of complexity and bad for that reason. It's bad because it's not equal treatment with traditional financial institutions. So when you remove cash from your bank account or even when you send a wire from your bank account the record keeping requirements are flexible. The bank has to record all of the information you gave them about the transaction but there's certain fields like the recipient of the transaction where they only need to record the name and physical address for example if that information is available and so the law makes these excuses if you will for incomplete information at traditional financial institutions like banks. So why would we not get the same excuses at bitcoin financial institutions and. It seems as though there's just wasn't interest in providing that kind of flexibility to the crypto world that there is in the traditional financial world where most of the money laundering actually takes place. But also i mean showing its true colours where customers surveillance or consumer protections comes into play. Seems like the state tends to choose surveillance over consumer protections because as much as we tell everyone to custody their own coins. There's a large percentage of people who are a lot safer with their funds on an exchange and sending it back and forth to regular people and so taking that group of people that don't have any of those best practices and telling them now. Hey the only way for you to send or receive money is for you to self custody your coins and we're gonna see a lot of very unsophisticated. People losing a lot of

Fincen Treasury Lick Taryn Bitcoin Government Vitale
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on AM 1530 WCKG

AM 1530 WCKG

01:37 min | 4 months ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on AM 1530 WCKG

"For a scoreboard Update will get to one before them. John Swisher's starting to write down those early scores. Here comes the draw, handoff and good running up the middle Hawks almost pride that ball out of there. Good job by Jordan Simmons of hanging on to the football and he gets nine on a first down carry. That was good blocking by the middle of the Michigan State. You know, that's the first time we've seen that brought the offside. Hand over and trapped. On our right side of the defense. Good old Jack Heflin and Zach van Valkenburgh. Davion. Nixon is out there with Chancery Gholston second down and short the ball at the 35. Fake on the run this time, Lombardi says. He throws it up picked up intercepted by the hot guys. Iowa gets the ball right back on. He stormed over but tacklers or was it Barrington? Way? The linebacker. He was running and coverage on that right flat and a really bad decision by Rocky Lombardi and he was getting blips on. He just threw it up for grabs. Those two receivers kind of in the area, but they weren't even looking for the ball. We're happy to say it's not been a good homecoming for Rocky Lombardi. Look at the replay answer who is blitzing? Barrington Wade comes up with this second interception. It's like, you know, there's not a blitz. It's just a great stunt move by Van Valkenburgh. He's got a sack. And he was as big a part of that forced turnover. Yes, Barrington Wade was Tyler Goodson's in the backfield. Oh, the Hawks again with great field position. Go up 28 nothing with a score here. Big hole.

Rocky Lombardi Barrington Wade Zach van Valkenburgh middle Hawks John Swisher Jordan Simmons Hawks Jack Heflin Michigan State Chancery Gholston Iowa Nixon Tyler Goodson football
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

12:47 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"Warren. Thank you. Mr chairman. So virtual currencies are an interesting innovation that at least theoretically could provide benefits to consumers, but they also at the same time could empower scammers and criminals and the challenge here, I think is for us to try to figure out how to nurture the productive uses a virtual currencies while protecting consumers from scammers and other sorts of threats. Now, one argument I often hear is that crypto currencies are decentralized that anyone can mind new currency. Unlike our current system, which relies on a central Bank to perform that function. John Trevor beanie, I know you're a skeptic of that client, could you just say a word about why. First of all, I mean favor of digital payments systems, but we can have digital payments systems without having currencies. And as I pointed out in the US in China in India in Africa and Europe, the tons of digital payments them the do billions of transactions every day. They're used by these people at low cost. So it's not the question of being in favor of only casual digital payments. Is the fintech allows you to do that. I'm asking you that about decentralisation the claim that crypto currencies had the benefit because they are decentralized. And I said you're skeptical of that it's it's falls that minors are all centralized, and it's a problem because you want you can have fifty one percent attacks and those kinds of attacks have occurred every day on smaller cryptocurrencies, so you can still the money and gone forever that those kinds of such attacks and people say, well, if you do it on bitcon your this throwing bitcoin, but if you have an poli what doesn't do they increase the prices increase their margins prophets. If you look at the transaction cost in this space, they've gone through the roof as miners arriving Shortlands option the last that have gone up by two hundred percent because they're using that all ego power to impose higher fees. It's an oligopoly. That's why is inefficient New York University. Professor Nouri a Rubini. Should about the consequences of this this concentration that you're you see is that inherent in the crypto currency. Or is it something that government could do something about it's inaccurate? And because there are economies of scale in mining and these economies of scale, the tar improve of work become worse. Once we get to scalable systems like proof of stake where wherever is a great state to begin with can do more of the mining. So there is massive concentration already improve a work. People say that's not scalable, we're gonna move to proof of stake. The proof of stake is going to become even more concentrated I finished. Then you need massive mining factories all over China Iceland to do the scale of transaction. He cannot do it on a laptop. That's why you need to concentrate on Nellie Gopal is. Okay. So you're saying it is inherent here. You know, these new technologies create these new opportunities. But if we're not careful they can follow the. Same old patterns of they make the rich richer, and they leave everybody else behind. I wanna ask about another one. And we'll see if we can get these together because I want to ask Dr van Valkenburgh, according to reports more than one point one billion dollars of crypto currency was stolen in the first half of twenty eighteen why is crypto currency so easy to steal? And what should we be thinking about security? So those thefts were primarily with regard to newer crypto currencies who had experienced massive price increases, and we're being secured by exchanges or businesses usually overseas who didn't scale their security in line with the value. That was rising that was a speculative bubble. I would not disagree with Docker opinion on that account. I was irrational, and it was triggered by this ICO market, which is largely fraud or unregistered securities issuance which. Of course, not permitted. So bitcoin was not involved in in the majority of the amounts that you're talking about there. It was these tiller bitcoin it was other. You know, I worry that. Because a lot of small investors get into the virtual currency markets through initial coin offerings or ICO's, which allow companies to raise money by creating and selling these new virtual currencies, and you've just described two huge bubble around one of these in twenty seventeen companies raise more than six billion dollars using ICO's a record that's been broken by April of this year. So let me ask you, Mr. van Valkenburgh? A study came out earlier this year that said that eighty percent of ICO's in twenty seventeen or scams SEC chairman. Jay Clayton has suggested the right approach uncovering the scams and protecting investors is to regulate ICO's security. Offerings. And I just want to ask if you agree with that approach. I know we're over time. But if I could just permit the witness to answer, I do agree with that approach is I said, the majority of ICO's have you there've been unregistered securities issuance or scams as chairman Clayton has said, the SEC has made very careful and deliberate policy here. I think they've done an excellent job. They released a report helping people understand these things they created a website, helping them understand them in a visual physical way. And they've brought targeted enforcement actions that I think has started to chill these markets and make them more rational. That said I think you can do a token sale and comply with securities laws as you should. And we're seeing the emergence of companies doing that selling only to accredited investors or and I think this will happen in the near future even doing public registration and offering tokens to shareholders. But what are you saying at its core is that an unregulated market lets consumers at risk, and what's critical is to get the right regulations in place. Often often our current regulation securities laws work well for the last hundred years or almost and I think they'll continue to Peter van Valkenburgh with coin center. Thank you. Thank you both for being here. Senator Chris van Holland Rabin. You mentioned your support for digital payments systems innovation fintech clearly has reduced inefficiencies in the payment system. It is not yet succeeded in getting the fed though to move to a real time payment system, something I've been pushing hard for because the current system where it takes time still the clear checks has really been hurting a lot of lower income people who were living paycheck to paycheck. I was pleased to see the fed recently announced that it's going to try and accelerate this effort, you have an opinion on using innovation to get to a real time payment system is the fence moving toward I hope. Yes, I'm all in favor of it. And our technology can be used to achieve that particular result in principle. You know, the banks have access to the balance sheet of the fed, but you can have a system where every corporation individual has access to that balance sheet. You don't need to have a blockchain for that. You have it on one ledger is secured by the fed. And if you do that, however, you have consequences because right now the deposit in the banking system are essentially former money. That sent to the payment system. If you go to a central Bank digital currency, and you have everybody accessing that one then that'd be massive is intermediation of private deposits, and then the banks have to find themselves in a different way. So talk about going in that direction of opening up the balance sheet central Bank, everybody important consequences for the financial system. The point is that you can do all these things, but you don't need blockchain, or if you're not going to be a public one where a bunch of minors in China going to verify transactions our financial system that doesn't make any. I'm not disagree with you. Dr just been pushing I've been disappointed the fed is not move more quickly to implement a real time payment system. And I think the fact is a drag on a lot of consumers while I've got you here, though, I do want to ask you a question of where you see the economy going because you are one of the people who predicted the two thousand eight financial. The crash not only predicted it, but you predicted mechanics and economic and financial forces behind it. And you have written about your concern about the economy in around twenty twenty a concern, I share, and I just want to know your article of September eleventh is the next financial crisis already brewing. Question Mark, where you talk about the fact that the stimulus which was the sort of tax cuts, which added one point eight trillion dollars to our debt was ill-timed that it will create a drag on the economy in a number of years and the EUFOR for C difficult economic times ahead given that you predicted the two thousand eight financial crash. I thought I'd take the time to get your opinion on where we're headed right now. William brief. I would say these year growth is going to be because of the stimulus close to three percent is going to be less than three percent next year. My concerns about two thousand twenty one because we'll have a fiscal cliff. This is a replay of C span radio programming from Monday. Secondly, because the fed rightly overeating a Konami as to garage will increase interest rates short rates are gonna go higher long. It's gonna go higher. The dollar's going to strengthen credit spreads are gonna why. Then that tightening of financial condition is gonna throw economic growth. I worried about protection has been trade wars slowing down Kinama growth and also worried about other stagflation ary policies like Listrik thing migration, resting capital, inflows, and outflows and FDI restricting investment in the environment and not having any infrastructure plan, reducing growth and increasing inflation. We also know that asset prices are frothy. And if there's a shock to growth that could be significant correction so there was. Combination of factors may may lead to a stall of economic growth by two thousand twenty. Well, you you summarized it very well. And my question to you. If you could just take a moment talk about something, many of us have said is likely to happen. Which is when you have a an economy that was already on a rapidly rising trajectory, and you add to that huge amount of that how that creates a fiscal drag and crowds out private investment down the road and actually slows down the economy. After the overheating period is over can you just talk about that for a second. Yeah. Briefly. It's first time we have two trillion dollars fiscal stimulus in peacetime without the recession that leads to a higher longer short and long term interest rates deletes overheating forces the fed to hike more soon and faster leads to a stronger dollar, and he also leads to a larger current account and trade deficit if the savings of the government use our trade deficit two percent of GDP go towards three percent. And therefore the protection is pressure may increase over time. So it's an ill advise fiscal stimulus. Thank you. I appreciate. Senator Cortez maskco. Thank you. Thank you gentlemen for being here. I would like to go back to Senator Jones conversation with you. When it comes to. Identifying sex trafficking, drug trafficking, money laundering. And I just want some clarification Mr. van Valkenburgh does bitcoin or any similar platform have a protocol in place to detect when it's cryptocurrency is being used by individuals to facilitate sex trafficking, drug trafficking, money laundering. Is there a protocol in place? So bitcoin is a peer to peer network of persons. Running software around the world, and that software is developed itself by people around the world, it's a voluntary system if you will. So there's no corporate form to set and guarantee policies across all users. That said there are several intermediaries were building their businesses on top of bitcoin. Just as you saw several companies build their businesses on top of the shared an open internet back in the nineties and those businesses especially those that are based in regulated here in the US do have those policies for identifying and policing elicit use of the network, and they do file suspicious activity reports..

fed Mr. van Valkenburgh ICO China chairman US John Trevor beanie Europe Warren. Senator Chris van Holland Rabi New York University Jay Clayton Shortlands Peter van Valkenburgh
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WEEI

WEEI

07:55 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WEEI

"Woods will play Jon Rahm. We'll see if you can be at least somewhat effective there. Justin Thomas and ROY McElroy three. Oh, six AM. Brooks kept Kepala Casey Webb Simpson. Justin, Rose, Tony female. Tommy Fleetwood Fleetwood has been fantastic in this along with. Francesco Molinari their foreign, oh, I have not been excited by what I've seen thus far. I don't know that they're out of it. But by all purpose. It's over ten six. It's happened before where we've come back and made the spectacular comeback, but you have to get a fourteen and a half points to win. And if I'm doing my math correctly. Ten. Plus four and a half is fourteen and a half. So the Ryder Cup can be won by the Europeans with just four and a half points. It'll probably be over pretty early in the day. There'll be a lot of matches going on that are completely and utterly meaningless. But you start to scratch your head. And you start to wonder why the heck can't we win in Europe? And a guy by the name of Kevin van Valkenburgh, senior writer ESPN wrote a very very interesting story saying we are much better at using analytics to understand sports these days, there are still some things with the Ryder Cup that we don't understand that our head scratchers. But there are a handful of things that really do make sense in the first one he gets to number one for whatever reason Ryder Cup makes Tiger Woods, mortal. And he's right. I mean, Tiger Woods is awful in the team play at the Ryder Cup. We knew that going in. But Tiger Woods was so hot you. How could you not put him on the? Team right, especially after winning. I mean, he's already selected when he won the tournament east like the tour championship. But the fact is that you were we were all kind of on board with select again before that bad call Phil Mickelson fad, call the main reason that those guys and most of these guys this is another one of his points here is there they play a style golfing America, which I've never heard this before huge golf, and I follow golf pretty closely. But I've never heard this term. I know what it means on. Maybe this guy made it up, but the bomb and gouge style of golf, which is bombed out there and go find it and try to get it on the green. Well, this course, let championship gold for something. Like that. In Paris is not that style. We're talking to Flint Wheeler last hour. He brought it up. There are a lot of guys on the American team who haven't even brought drive out of the bag. And that's why Tommy Fleetwood and Francesco Molinari who are more precise. Golfers are doing so. Oh, well, stay in the fairway. Patrick rita's been hitting balls more in the water, then on the grass. So the style of golf that the Americans play does not suit european-gulf. So obviously when we're going over there, which is every other year to play the Ryder Cup. They're gonna put us on courses that does not suit American styles of golf. So it makes sense. I mean, you look at it from that perspective. It's a very very good way to break it down. And why is it that the Americans aren't able to play that kind of golf? This is another thing. I find interesting, and I gripe about this every time we hear golfers, and it's generally it majors. They don't do it in regular PGA tour events, but in majors how many times have we heard golfers specially the Americans, but there. The Europeans do it as well. But when the course is too hard for whatever reason rough is too long, the greens are too fast. Whatever it is. They come plane. They're the biggest weiner's when it comes to. The course not suiting their game and van Valkenburgh gets into that. Saying that the PGA tour kind of. Cottle's American golfers. They set up the courses to suit their games. He says it's not like other sports. They are the product not the labor if the players don't like the core setup. They go to complaining about it until it gets changed. And if it doesn't guess what they skip that event, unless it's a major, whereas the Europeans, whatever man, they're more pliable more, flexible, more dapple and go out there play any kind. Of course, it's another thing. I thought couldn't be true that when it comes to the pairing of the players together, I always scratch my head and wonder why are those two guys playing together? What makes a coach put those two guys together? While a lot of times, it's comfort ability are those two guys comfortable together. Another part of it. This is the interesting thing because they play the specific ball. So if it's a title list or tailor-made ball or a Bridgestone whatever because in four ball you hit or maybe it's four psalms. I was confused but in one of its alternate shot. So one guy hits than the next guy hits. They're hitting the same ball. And that they play a different ball every other week of the year. They're going to be flustered when they come up and play this other guys ball. So they put all the title guys together and all the Bridgestone guys together. I'm like that is preposterous. Guess who doesn't do that? Guess who doesn't care about that the Europeans whenever let me golf ball gonna hit it? Keep it in the fairway put on the green knock it in Americans are just way too caught up in all this garbage. The other thing is going to be friends with the guy now in this. Contesting of the Ryder Cup, the two Americans that have been good, Justin, Thomas and Jordan Spieth. Our best buds. So it's worked out okay in that particular iteration, but a lot of times it's like these guys have to be friendly with each other before they can go out there and perform out of very high level, which I think is ridiculous go out there and play your game. But there are things that get into your head like Tiger Woods back to the first point. Van Valkenburgh gets into this whole thing about they've tried everything to get somebody to play with Tiger Woods. Whether it's a veteran, a rookie who doesn't know any better, a nobody. And also ran that just barely made the team kind of a guy just every sort of different kind of player to go out there and play with Tiger Woods. And it hasn't worked. Patrick Reed has been a trophyless. They also put him with Brian the Shambo. I agree. He described it as listless and non-competitive. I agree. I was watching both of them. They both seem board. Whereas the Europeans are like fired up ready to go. Tiger Woods now. Has lost his last seven consecutive team matches and Ryder Cup. He's nine seventeen in one. When playing with another guy, so they can't figure out how to get Tiger Woods rolling in the Ryder Cup. And it's been twenty five years since we've won in Europe. I think if I remember correctly, it's not in this article. But they've only ever won two times in Europe two times, they do.

Tiger Woods Tommy Fleetwood Fleetwood Ryder Cup Francesco Molinari Justin Thomas Europe Van Valkenburgh Bridgestone Kevin van Valkenburgh ROY McElroy Phil Mickelson Brooks Kepala Casey Webb Simpson Jon Rahm Patrick rita Flint Wheeler golfing ESPN
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Slate's Hang Up and Listen

Slate's Hang Up and Listen

04:38 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Slate's Hang Up and Listen

"Yeah, that's sort of what I meant earlier. When I said you can ascribe anything to Ray Lewis because I think that it is easy and right to want to ask tough questions about his role in the murders and obstruction of Justice. I mean, he hasn't addressed them really, but I think Kevin raised some good points in his in his story. But I also think that you know, if you want to, you can try to make all of Ray Lewis's stick cohere and but I don't think it is. I, I, I also really liked reading those back to back, but I do think you can kind of pick out that, you know, Kevin van Valkenburgh covered the ravens as a. b. reporter for a long time. And you know, feels he lived or lives in Baltimore. And I think he probably. Feels a little bit more of a tied to that community. So I, I still, I don't. I didn't find that like as moving, I guess. Well, Vinson the Clem co piece about the kind of protective wall around. Lewis is reminiscent of what we were talking about with urban Meyer again. Right? Just this notion that how dare you ask these questions? Not only am I not going to answer the question, but I'm going to bully you and mock you for even asking right and the that that sinister touch that you mentioned about him being like, I'll pray for you. You know, I forgive you is this sort of awful. This is where you see the sort of the culture of football dove-tailing very close to the sort of prosperity gospel culture. That's like nobody ever does anything really wrong. Everything can. Be kind of explained the way, and also the person who's done the worst thing is somehow the victim in the situation that asking questions as a form of persecution, that that cynicism cynicism of the kind that journalists, you know, tend to, you know, tend to partake in is, is is mixed. You some sort of unhealthy doubter. The Clem copious was amazing, and it kinda just turned my stomach at it though the way there's a moment and that after he he asks, but before the sort of Christ like forgiveness of Ray Lewis, where all of the the sort of PR folks at the ravens are kind of being like, why would you? Why would you ask that question? Like it seems like they're not only sort of professionally affronted, but personally, like they can't imagine why they're sort of like in-house. Ted talk would be subjected to to this kind of question. You know, not even accurate a question. It was kind of disheartening. Yeah, and I think that we'll probably get into this a little bit in our next segment about that helmet role. But the other thing that I found really notable and smart about the van Valkenburgh piece was this idea that even though Ray Lewis just retired five years ago that the NFL has really changed significant. Bentley in that period and just the way that he played and kind of him as like this avatar of toughness and manliness and the the aggression and the wanting to destroy people on the field. I mean, I think that is why he rather than trello ends is kind of seen as this guy who stands for something bigger and newsstands for the sport. It's almost like again, even though it's only five years ago, he's like represents bygone era in a way. Yeah, I, I think that's definitely right, but I also think that he's more embraced by the NFL because of his like humility stick. I mean, he's the complete opposite to te'o and that way he has the humbleness. He has the gods stuff. You know, he famously said, what was it last season that del Beckham had like lost God, and that's why he was having problems or whatever. I mean like that is his entire thing, and I think it's easier for the NFL to sell that version even if he's full of shit, this hang up and listen is brought to you by lactate morning coffee or pick up basketball game, big bowl of.

Ray Lewis ravens Kevin van Valkenburgh Meyer NFL Baltimore del Beckham Vinson Clem reporter basketball Ted Bentley football five years
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WGR 550 Sports Radio

WGR 550 Sports Radio

01:47 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WGR 550 Sports Radio

"His penalty this weekend dr fun tweets and love the game of golf did not bother me at all in fact it made me laugh when nothing else was remotely funny in that round and also made andrew johnson laugh and he should be everyone's hero it did not influence anything other than the emotion of psychotics but sports is full of people who act rationally this is sort of what we do we take instances like this we overreact harshly and strongly to them in the realm of our specific sport and we expect everyone to understand and view it as normal this is one of those situations where out of the context of being a golf purist being someone who's is firmly ingrained and the problem with this is so many of us are going to react strongly against phil because there are just fewer gulf diehards again i will go back to kevin van valkenburgh are espn the magazine senior writer who said one of the whiny takes about this mickelson stuff is the fact that people in golf take this so seriously is why people hate golf a really we spent literally a year as nfl fans and media fighting over whether air pressure and football's was the biggest scandal in sports which is just proof there are a lot more die hard football fans than there are diehard golf fan because to a lot of people in football and i shouldn't say too many because a lot of us looked at that and thought it was nonsense to but for the people that were overreacting strongly it's just proof that there are more diehard football fans and there are die hard golf fan so of course more people are going to take that more seriously than we should then the level of people who are willing to accept this from.

golf phil football andrew johnson kevin van valkenburgh espn the magazine writer mickelson nfl
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on KNBR The Sports Leader

KNBR The Sports Leader

01:48 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on KNBR The Sports Leader

"Kevin van valkenburgh is an espn senior writer he has been covering the us open doing a great job in long island he joins us now on the shell pennzoil performance line kevin when did you know that this was going to be brooks kept his day today feeling a little bit after patrick read started to fall back that brooks is just gonna he was going to be relentless you know he's such a strong player you so rocksolid isn't really make a lot of mistakes when tommy fleetwood went out and fired a sixty three and wants to sixty two it got a little bit interesting i think that's been a little bit of time kind of hanging out with him watching him watch the golf which is interesting but i it's just too strong is this you know the the first guy to win back to back open since curtis strange the guy who guy did it to that was ben hogan so it's a pretty special accomplishment kevin what do you think that's going through woods mine the main very few were able to how a sixty three and not win usually what a sixty three s usually good enough to get it done what's going through tommy's mine right now yeah talk a little bit and he i think he feels pretty good about his performance is the highest it's ever finished in a major you know everybody out here who is kind of like a golf nerd just loves fleetwood because not only is he's super nice guy but he hits it so flush every time and so knowing that this this kind of performance was probably coming i think a little bit bummed about that putt on eighteen but he was also just saying you know what if i could have made a putt earlier in the week that you know what it gives me that one stroke you know it all they all count and so i think he maybe would have liked to hit that last putt on eighteen a little firmer but you know i think overall he's pretty happy you you got three hours to process that so he he's he's in good place kevin van valkenburgh is live at the us open we're brooks kafka has won back to.

Kevin van valkenburgh writer patrick tommy fleetwood curtis brooks kafka espn pennzoil ben hogan three hours
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WGR 550 Sports Radio

WGR 550 Sports Radio

01:48 min | 2 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WGR 550 Sports Radio

"Kevin van valkenburgh is an espn senior writer he has been covering the us open doing a great job in long island he joins us now on the shell pennzoil performance line kevin when did you know that this was going to be brooks cup day today feeling a little bit after patrick green started to fall back that brooks is just gonna he was going to be relentless you know he's such a strong player you so rocksolid he doesn't really make a lot of mistakes when tommy fleetwood went out and fired a sixty three and a who wants to sixty two he got a little bit interesting i think that's been a little bit of time kind of hanging out with him watching him watch the golf which is interesting but this is just too strong you know the the first guy to win back to back open since curtis strange the guy who owned did previous to that was ben hogan so it's a pretty special accomplishment kevin what do you think they're going through fleetwood smile i mean very few were able to have a sixty three and not win usually what a sixty three s usually good enough to get it done let's going through tommy's mine right now yeah talk a little bit and he i think he feels pretty good about his performance is the highest it's ever finished in a major you know everybody out here who is kind of like golf nerd just loves fleetwood because not only if he's super nice guy but he hits it so wash every time and so knowing that this this kind of performance was probably coming i think he is a little bit bummed about that putt on eighteen but he was also just saying you know what if i could have made a putt earlier in the week that you know what it gives me that one stroke you know it all they all count and so i think he maybe would've liked to hit that last part on eighteen a little firmer but i think overall he's pretty happy you get three hours to process that so he's he's in good place kevin van valkenburgh is live at the us open we're brooks kafka has won back to back.

Kevin van valkenburgh writer patrick green tommy fleetwood curtis brooks kafka espn pennzoil ben hogan three hours
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on ESPN Pittsburgh

ESPN Pittsburgh

01:43 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on ESPN Pittsburgh

"And espn app moega ari attempt can filling in you briefly mentioned the weather i'm reading what i'm reading doesn't sound good well what are they saying down there about what's expected weather wise tomorrow yeah rain all day tomorrow whether the rain is holding that down to suspend play or whether they'll be able to get eighteen in it's a little unclear i would say i would guess that what is most likely is that guys will be playing you know more than eighteen holes on sunday that maybe get half of their rounds in tomorrow and then the raiders is going to be too much the good thing about augusta is that they have so much money here that they can dry out the course and make it playable in matter of hours you know we there's sort of no one moves confirm it but you can hear it then you have this giant sub systems that like sucks water out from underneath the fairways greens stuff and so eventually like they'll be able to get the course totally playable and then when it's really kind of soft guys are going to be able to fire at pans and that's what's gonna make sunday really fun i think you'll see a lot of birdies and that when that happens it can really the rumors get big energy gets big and anyone can win kevin great stuff we appreciate the time tonight man enjoy the final two rounds should be a lot of fun guys thanks kevin van valkenburgh with us on the shell pennzoil performance line joining us from augusta getting set for round three the masters could be played in a quagmire tomorrow i went with quagmire midway through and tiger woods really nowhere near the top leaderboard patrick read leads the masters by two strokes over mark leash freddie and fitz simons.

raiders augusta espn kevin van valkenburgh pennzoil freddie fitz simons
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WEEI

WEEI

01:41 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on WEEI

"Around it normally might have shots every five and you gotta you know that speech is going to continue this this kind of tournament this tournament the masters pretty much for the next fifteen years he just everything about this course suits and he's always going to be around the leaderboard and there on sunday kevin van valkenburgh is with us from agusta he's covering the masters espn senior writer with us on the shell pennzoil performance line freddie and fitz simons on espn radio and the espn app egger ari temp can filling in you briefly mentioned the weather i'm reading i'm reading doesn't sound good well what are they saying down there about what's expected weatherwise tomorrow yeah it's gonna rain old age tomorrow weather or the rain is harder that they'll have to suspend play or whether they'll be able to get eighteen in it's a little unclear i would say i would guess that what is most likely is guys will be playing you know more than eighteen holes on sunday that they'll maybe get half of their rounds in tomorrow the raiders has got to be too much the good thing about augusta is that it's the have so much money here that they can dry out the course and make it playable in a matter of hours a week there's sort of no one will serve confirm it but you can hear it they had this giant sub system that like sucks water out from underneath the fairways greens and stuff and so eventually like they'll be able to get the course totally playable and then when it's really kind of soft guys are going to be able to fire at pans and that's what's gonna make sunday really fun i think you'll see a lot of birdies and that when that happens it can really the rulers get big energy gets big and anyone can win.

kevin van valkenburgh writer fitz simons raiders augusta espn pennzoil freddie fifteen years
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

Epicenter Bitcoin

02:05 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

"That said the real projects in this space recognize a few things and this is not just them marketing themselves trying to position themselves in a way that's defensible from the law or from ethical standpoints real projects in this space understand that you need maybe to raise some money by selling tokens but the main thing that the focus needs to do is create an open market for participation in whatever the service is going to ccomplish what that means is they're going to be reward for doing things on the blockchain they're going to be reward for securing the blockchain if it's proof of work they're going to be reward for people who provide goods or services through the blockchain centralized computing system so if you provide cloud storage to the cloud storage network that's described by blockchain and can be purchaseable with the token then you should be rewarded with the token as a provider and then when consensus mechanisms are proof of stake based instead of proof of work based in that case you need people to have the tokens in order to play that valuable role as economic weight in the consensus you know in bitcoin your economic weight in the consensus the reason why we can trust it is the fact that you invested all of your money into these useless computers and you're feeding them electrically from dam in western china while until recently in proof of stake we believe in the system because the people who are actually powering it had to sink all his capital into these tokens whether they're either if he's the roost steak finally or anything else and that won't necessarily be reliable into centralized system if the only people staking or the people who were the original investors so finding a way to get tokens more widely distributed is important for the technology now what should you do i think if you're a developer and you wanna show good faith and maybe take less risks from a regulatory standpoint you should give them away or you should make them reward ron.

china developer ron
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

Epicenter Bitcoin

02:10 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

"If only raised about three million dollars from what i recall is age eighteen eighteen now so really like peanuts compared to these ridiculous sales that are going on today and i think they raise them from people who primarily purchased an interest in this future network because they wanted to use this feature network a lot of people might have thought like oh all get rich off of this but these were sophisticated people these were like people who'd been in the bitcoin ecosystem for a long time a lot of them were developers a lot of them were excited to develop on a decentralized virtual machine on the vm and they knew that they'd be able to use it as soon as it was ready if they pre bought the token and then a lot of people used it there was an explosion of mostly not great but you know early early versions of things are never great decentralized app since contracts including the dow including other things so i think you can make a really good case that under the facts circumstances of the either sale your average investor may have been motivated by a desire to get rich but was definitely also motivated by a desire to use the tech and make this ecosystem function and work and become the future contrast that with with somebody buying you know some some guy who's not even got a computer science background doesn't know what blockchain is saves life which is most people and that's fair is complicated who like it's a hot tip from a friend who's in a telegram group to go buy some ex token i'm not gonna name any and then x token raises two billion dollars from investors none of whom know what the hell x token even does like x token might still be real and it might be as a theory but the motivations of everyone involved are radically different than they were in two thousand fourteen now absolutely now let's let's take this in finger little bit about what.

dow three million dollars two billion dollars
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

Epicenter Bitcoin

02:05 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

"House and with respect to crypto they're relevant because i think about two years ago now in two thousand fifteen or two thousand sixteen probably three years ago now two thousand fifteen they came out and said look bitcoin is a commodity for our purposes when it is the underlying asset in a financial derivative like a debt coin future or swap and they brought new brought an action against coin flip i think was the company for being an unregistered derivatives clearing organization and since then they've been looking at this space they've got a great educational group called lab cftc where they go and they direct people to learn more about the technology in some of the investor protection risks and they asked people to common teach them about technology in the kind of experiment with the lab and then they've got policing story and this is something a lot of people don't know they've actually got the authority to investigate police evidence of market manipulation or fraud at the spot market level and so the spot markets cryptocurrencies are the exchanges there things like wine base or or zappa and that means that the cfcc doesn't license or or force them to register with them they're not a supervisory authority instead the ftc can subpoena those exchanges for records if they think there's evidence of fraud manipulation and then police the mex ante or ex post rather after the fact for evanson fraud so so so challenging carlos talking about that jurisdiction it's a perfect compliment i think to sharon clayton's sec jurisdiction i think the sec where we're headed is the sec's going handle the issuance side of this when new tokens come into the world and they are just promises of efforts i e securities and the cftc will handle the tokens once they're actually based on open source software based on open blockchain working in the world.

market manipulation fraud ftc carlos sec cftc zappa sharon clayton three years two years
"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

Epicenter Bitcoin

02:17 min | 3 years ago

"van valkenburgh" Discussed on Epicenter Bitcoin

"Sec which is the securities issuance investor protection regular the us both chairman testified before the senate banking committee on the subject of crypto currencies exclusively which is quite radical cryptocurrencies anto kits but i mean it was really a watershed moment i think because we hadn't had we've had hearings that are about bitcoin or that are about to centralization with respect to you know terrorist financing money laundering with respect to innovation in america and small businesses and how can we have more competition because of these things that we've had positive hearings hearings focused on the risks we've never had a hearing that focused wholesale on investor protection issues like commodities regulation securities regulation nor have we had a hearing i think where to chairman of two major agencies testified so that was the senate banking committee about two maybe three weeks ago and i think the house financial services committee so other side of the capitol building the house in the senate bicameral legislation they wanted to have a hearing on this and and not necessarily solicit the same information from the same to agency heads but instead solicit information from the industry and the ecosystem so i was testifying alongside of mike limps who's i think general counsel and chief risk officer for coin base dr brummer from georgetown who's he was the minority witness for the democrats and as a lot of things to say about my adequate disclosures for ico's and he's an academic at georgetown law and an attorney in the space rob rosenbloom who is as many clients who were doing ico's and things like that and then myself as a member of or a director research aucoin center which is for you know hopefully your listeners already know but were like a nonprofit that just wants to do good education and defend the technology as technology we're not defending the interests of coin base or any company were trying to defend the interests of users the rights of people who want to actually use this stuff.

attorney mike senate america terrorist financing director research aucoin cente rob rosenbloom us georgetown law ico georgetown chief risk officer general counsel senate banking committee chairman three weeks