SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The trial of a Southern California-based financial scam is now set to go to the penalty phase next Tuesday to determine how much the company and the scheme's architect, Steve Chen, should pay the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Last month, a federal judge ruled that Chen's Gemcoin operation was fraudulent. "The violation took place over years and involved elaborate schemes," US District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner wrote in a summary judgment against Chen. "Defendant has shown no sign of recognition of wrongdoing and has offered no assurances against future violations." The SEC argued in court filings on December 21, 2016 that the remaining issues should be determined by the judge and not a jury and that said judge should find "in favor of sizeable penalties."
Amazingly, the amber mines did actually exist, according to a report filed late last year by the court-appointed receiver.
Some background on the Gemcoin scam and ensuing lawsuit.
How could an average person have known this was a scam? And how is this Gemcoin different, i.e. less reliable, than a more established crypto-currency like Bitcoin? Money is only money because people accept it. What makes Gemcoin a scam rather than a failed attempt at competing with Bitcoin?
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @07:13PM
<sarcasm>Why of course, Social Darwinism is the way to go... there is plenty of evidence that this leads to a better society, where you always have to look over your shoulder because you could get mugged, stabbed, scammed, killed, etc...</sarcasm>
I don't get why you would even begin to contemplate a world where social darwinism is a desirable state of affairs... unless, of course, you not only recognize that you are just a simple and primitive animal (I'm with you up to right here) but also that you explicitly state that you do not aspire to be anything more than this primitive creature (and this is where I have a problem with your kind of animal).
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @07:34PM
Rarely does one have the honor of witnessing such an explicit straw man rebuttal; I mean, you even brazenly replaced me with your preferred, "sarcasm"-delimited opponent (which, by the way, betrays a poor understanding of what sarcasm is, anyway).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @08:22PM
Nah, I think you're wrong, your parent was correct.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @09:23PM
I think all Anonymous Coward posts are incorrect.
Shit, paradox.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday January 05 2017, @09:42PM
It is not at all paradox if you don't believe what you wrote. Now if you had left out the "I think" part …
… it still would not have been a paradox.Because the negation of "all AC posts are incorrect" is "not all AC posts are incorrect", that is, "there is at least one AC post that is correct". Which then obviously is another one.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 05 2017, @11:01PM
My guess is that he sees himself as the uber-alpha male who is someday destined to rule over all the rest of us. More likely, though, is that he is a beta male wannabe who would soon end up as fish food in such a world of survival of the fittest. Just sayin'.