Media Search:



There’s a Battle Over Carbon Emerging from the War in Ukraine – POLITICO

In contrast to de Klerks initiative, the State Environmental Inspectorates methodology isnt designed to tally indirect emissions like those from the displacement of Ukrainian victims of the war. Neither does it account for prospective emissions from the eventual reconstruction. Rather, for now, the draft methods will inventory emissions from only hostilities-related wildfires, damages to industrial facilities and fuel consumption by military equipment and nothing else. (The methods might be expanded in the future, for instance, to include emissions from infrastructure fires). Its the difference between making scientifically sound estimations the Initiative on GHG Accounting of Wars present domain and only collecting data that will meet a particular legal threshold and withstand the scrutiny of a judge picking them apart during a court case. The draft methods of the State Environmental Inspectorate of Ukraine are meant to fulfill the latter goal. They will, therefore, measure only those direct greenhouse gas emissions that can be calculated precisely and with what information is currently available, said Andrii Moroz, a lawyer who is advising the State Environmental Inspectorate.

For instance, wildfires from shelling often must meet criteria that ensure they arent naturally occurring. An atypically shaped blaze that follows a streak-line pattern characteristic of shelling, for instance, is a sign that it has not occurred randomly but is due to anthropogenic influence, as Savenets sometimes calls acts of war out of scientific habit. Meanwhile, the destruction of industrial property, say a pipeline or a power plant, must be formally attributed to Russian troops by official bodies like the State Emergency Service of Ukraine or the State Environmental Inspectorate of Ukraine, in order to attribute those emissions to Russia.

Alina Sokolenko, a sustainability expert who analyzes the legal questions arising from the wars environmental damages for Ukraines State Environmental Inspectorate, sums it up this way: Its not only a matter of how to measure, but [also] how to prove and how to receive compensation for these losses.

Should Ukraine go ahead with claims for greenhouse gas emissions, it would mark the first time a country seeks compensation for such damages resulting from an all-out war, Rutgers Law School professor Cymie Payne, an expert on international environmental reparations, told me. It would push our understanding of the harms of war to the environment in new directions.

The road to compensation would likely follow the usual legal procedures. First, the plaintiff Ukraine would have to show that it was injured because the defendant Russia broke the law. It would then have to show the extent and kind of harm it suffered, and also that the law is one that requires compensation.

Yes, the climate claims would be a long shot, largely because it will not be easy for the plaintiffs to establish that the greenhouse gases have caused Ukraine harm that is specific enough to be compensated. Still, Ukrainian experts point to a relevant precedent in international courts where a handful of lawsuits have resulted in the awarding of environmental damages from cross-border conflict. In the foremost of these cases, Kuwait accused Iraq of breaching the international law doctrine prohibiting unprovoked attacks when it spilled massive amounts of oil across the Kuwaiti desert during the Gulf War of the early 1990s. The United Nations Compensation Commission awarded Kuwait about $3 billion in monetary compensation just for those claims. In 2018, the International Court of Justice ruled that Nicaragua had to pay Costa Rica a few hundred thousand dollars in environmental compensation for illegally dredging a canal that damaged its wetlands.

Karen Hulme, at the University of Essex School of Law, thinks one possible, but never-before-tested path that Ukraine could take to make its claims would involve arguing that, like with Iraq, Russias invasion constitutes a breach of the prohibition on states to use unprovoked force against one another. That doctrine is enshrined in the United Nations Charter. Ukraine would need to further argue that Russia must make amends for all the resulting damage to the climate with monetary damages. Alternative arguments could claim breaches of the global climate rules tied to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or of states duty to prevent significant transboundary environmental damage, a doctrine of international law, Hulme said. It is so far unprecedented in international law for greenhouse gas emissions to qualify as damage in such claims, she warned. And so there would be many legal hurdles to pass.

View post:
There's a Battle Over Carbon Emerging from the War in Ukraine - POLITICO

ChatGPT breaks down 9 factors that can end Bitcoin as we know it – Finbold – Finance in Bold

Proponents of Bitcoin (BTC) argue that its decentralized nature offers protection against threats encountered by traditional financial systems. Nevertheless, like any other financial or investment product, Bitcoin is not immune to various threats that could potentially affect its existence.

In this context, Finbold sought insights from the artificial intelligence platform ChatGPT developed by OpenAI to understand the factors that could potentially bring about the end of Bitcoin as we know it. We posed the question, What can end Bitcoin as we know it? to the most advanced ChatGPT-4 premium AI version. Through this analysis, it became apparent that the pioneering cryptocurrency faces a spectrum of challenges, both external and internal, which are highlighted below:

The tool suggested that one of the most discussed vulnerabilities is the dreaded 51% attack. If a single entity gains control of over 50% of the Bitcoin networks computational power, it could potentially wreak havoc. Such an entity could double-spend coins or halt transactions. ChatGPT acknowledged that although this type of attack is expensive and unlikely to be financially practical, stating that at the moment, it remains a theoretical threat.

Another technical vulnerability is quantum computing. ChatGPT states that if quantum computers become powerful enough, they could break Bitcoins cryptographic security measures. It is worth noting that the crypto community has since identified this risk with plans to quell it.

Bitcoins decentralized nature has made it an attractive option for those looking to circumvent traditional financial systems. However, this very characteristic puts it in the crosshairs of governments worldwide. As per ChatGPT, regulatory crackdowns and bans on Bitcoin could significantly impact its adoption and drive users toward other digital assets or traditional currencies. In general, regulatory uncertainty is a constant shadow that the cryptocurrency world must navigate, making it a persistent concern for the future of Bitcoin.

Bitcoins value and adoption have been intricately tied to economic factors for years. Therefore, ChatGPT pointed out that a significant loss of confidence in Bitcoin due to major financial losses, large-scale fraud, or other scandals could lead to reduced adoption and value. At the same time, it cited threats such as a newer cryptocurrency or technology emerging with vastly superior features, which might overshadow Bitcoins first-mover advantage.

The viability of Bitcoin has been questioned over the cryptocurrencys Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus. Against this backdrop, the AI tool pointed out that critics argue that its energy consumption is unsustainable and harmful to the planet. Therefore, if concerns about its energy consumption continue to grow, there may be a substantial shift towards more eco-friendly cryptocurrencies or consensus mechanisms, potentially eroding Bitcoins dominance. As the world becomes increasingly conscious of environmental issues, Bitcoins environmental footprint remains a point of contention. However, it is worth noting that major miners are trying to turn to renewable energy sources for Bitcoin mining.

ChatGPT acknowledged that Bitcoin has faced persistent challenges in terms of transaction speed and costs, especially during heightened demand. While initiatives such as the Lightning Network have been introduced to tackle these issues, the risk of an inadequate scaling solution could potentially hinder Bitcoins ability to achieve wider adoption. The ongoing challenge of scaling is a critical issue that the Bitcoin community must continue to tackle to uphold its status as a viable digital currency.

Internal disputes within the Bitcoin community have sporadically arisen, particularly concerning its development trajectory. ChatGPT warns that should these disagreements escalate, they have the potential to result in additional forks, similar to the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) split, which could ultimately erode the communitys cohesion. The tool notes that sustaining a unified vision for Bitcoins future is imperative for its enduring success in the long run.

The AI tool suggests that the Bitcoin network is not immune to global disruptions. Natural disasters, widespread infrastructure failures, or global-scale cyber-attacks could disrupt the Bitcoin network, causing temporary or long-term damage. The resilience of the Bitcoin network in the face of unforeseen events remains an ongoing concern.

Governments such as the United States and China are actively exploring the potential of digital currencies, which could lead to the introduction of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) as potential substitutes for cryptocurrencies. In this case, ChatGPT opines that if prominent nations successfully deploy and endorse their CBDCs, these could present a more secure and regulated option compared to Bitcoin for everyday transactions, potentially diminishing Bitcoins attractiveness. The advent of CBDCs poses a notable competitive challenge to Bitcoin.

It is worth noting that the cryptocurrency ecosystem relies heavily on exchanges and wallet providers. Therefore, ChatGPT suggested that if a major exchange or wallet provider collapses or faces severe security issues, it could undermine confidence in the broader cryptocurrency ecosystem and impact Bitcoin. Therefore, safeguarding the infrastructure of the cryptocurrency world is essential to maintaining trust and stability.

In conclusion, while Bitcoin has withstood numerous challenges and has a resilient community of users and developers, it remains vulnerable to various internal and external factors. Staying abreast of these potential threats and actively addressing them will be crucial for the continued success and relevance of Bitcoin as a global digital currency.

Read the rest here:

ChatGPT breaks down 9 factors that can end Bitcoin as we know it - Finbold - Finance in Bold

Owner of 8K bitcoin lost in landfill threatens to bankrupt local council – Protos

A Welsh bitcoin investor who accidentally lost 8,000 bitcoin a decade ago after throwing the hard drive into the trash is now threatening to sue the local council overseeing the landfill its in and potentially bankrupt them, as he seeks to win $557 million in legal fees.

Newport City Council (NCC) has repeatedly said no to James Howells request to dig up the landfill and search for his bitcoin. However, as reported by the Telegraph, Howells is preparing to sue the council and stop them from carrying out other works on the site.

The proposed lawsuit aims to secure 446 million ($557 million) in damages, a value that matches the highest recorded price of his lost bitcoin.By asking for this amount, Howells is threatening to bankrupt NCC, saying that the recently declared bankrupt Birmingham City Council would not be the only Labour-run council to go bankrupt this year.

Ive tried everything I can for 10 years, they didnt want to play ball, so now we have to go down the legal route, he said.

In the open letter he sent to the council on September 4, Howells demanded they let him begin his landfill excavation work by September 18. Hes also asking for a judicial review into the lawfulness of the councils decisions throughout the bitcoin landfill ordeal.

James lost the BTC in 2013 after cleaning out his old office and throwing his bitcoin cold wallet into the trash. The 8,000 bitcoin was worth 446 million at its highest and roughly 166 million ($207 million) today.

For 10 years the council has not budged on its position, refusing Howells pleas to recover the lost bitcoin which the council says may or may not be in our landfill site.

A spokesperson said, The council has told Mr. Howells multiple times that excavation is not possible under our environmental permit, and that work of that nature would have a huge negative environmental impact on the surrounding area.

We will be offering no further comments on this issue as it takes up valuable officer time which could be spent on delivering services for the residents of Newport.

In 2022, Howells claimed to secure enough funding for the dig which documents from his legal team estimate would cost 11 million ($13.7 million).

He attempted to sway the council by promising 10% of his found bitcoin to be used in turning Newport into a crypto-mecca. He promised:

These promises, however, may not be welcomed by the residents of Newport if Howells does indeed bankrupt the Newport city council.

Do [NCC] want to spend 10,000 an hour to stop me digging a hole? How can you explain that to the taxpayers of Newport in the current climate? he said.

Got a tip? Send us an email or ProtonMail. For more informed news, follow us onX,Instagram,Bluesky, andGoogle News, or subscribe to ourYouTubechannel.

More:

Owner of 8K bitcoin lost in landfill threatens to bankrupt local council - Protos

Bitcoin all-time high in 2025? BTC price idea reveals ‘bull run launch’ – Cointelegraph

Bitcoin (BTC) is about to test hodlers with a mid cycle lull before starting a bull run in late 2024, a new BTC price model states.

According to its creator, popular analyst CryptoCon, the November 28th Cycles Theory demands the BTC price all-time high in 2025.

Amid debate over the nature of the current Bitcoin four-year price cycle, CryptoCon believes that all may be simpler than many imagine when it comes to how BTC/USD behaves at a given time.

Unveiling the November 28th chart on X (formerly Twitter), he delineated the date as a key pivot point in the year, along with a three-week period on either side.

Using 4-year time cycles against my Theory, produces Bitcoins exact behavior in time since its inception. Cycles are centered around the date of the first halving Nov 28th, he explained.

The chart describes November 28 as the date Bitcoin sees a bull run launch every four years. The last was in 2020 when BTC/USD broke beyond its prior all-time high (ATH) to hit its current $69,000 record a year later.

The next point of interest is thus November 2024. Until then, BTC price action will spend its time in a mid cycle lull.

After Bitcoin bottoms, price makes an early first cycle move (orange) and enters into a mid-cycle lull, CryptoCon continued.

He added that Bitcoin had almost certainly seen its early top, referencing the $31,800 local highs from July.

As Cointelegraph reported, opinions on where BTC price action will go into the 2024 block subsidy halving differ.

Related: Bitcoin halving can take BTC price to $148K by July 2025 Pantera Capital

Some argue that modest gains will be all that hodlers will see before the event, scheduled for April next year.

In an interview with Cointelegraph this week, Filbfilb, co-founder of trading suite DecenTrader, nonetheless delivered a $46,000 target for the halving, with $35,000 slated for year-end.

In his latest newsletter published on Sept. 5, meanwhile, CryptoCon summarized 2023 BTC price behavior as a bull market fakeout.

This makes it appear as if the bull market has begun with the trigger of many signals, but then at some point, price fails to continue, he wrote.

BTC/USD traded at $26,200 at the time of writing on Sept. 8, per data from Cointelegraph Markets Pro and TradingView.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.

Follow this link:

Bitcoin all-time high in 2025? BTC price idea reveals 'bull run launch' - Cointelegraph

Bitcoin-for-Cash Exchange Business Owner Agrees to Plead Guilty … – Department of Justice

LOS ANGELES A Santa Monica man has agreed to plead guilty to breaking federal law by allowing his cryptocurrency-cash exchange company to help scammers and drug traffickers launder millions of dollars in criminal proceeds through his business, the Justice Department announced today.

Charles James Randol, 33, agreed to plead guilty to a single-count information charging him with failure to maintain an effective anti-money laundering (AML) program, a crime that carries a statutory maximum sentence of five years in federal prison.

Both the information and plea agreement were filed today in United States District Court in downtown Los Angeles. Randol is expected to formally plead guilty to the charge in the coming weeks.

According to his plea agreement, from October 2017 to July 2021, Randol owned and operated a virtual-currency money services business that eventually was known as Digital Coin Strategies LLC. This company offered cryptocurrency-cash exchange services for a commission.

Randol offered his cryptocurrency exchange services in various ways, including meeting anonymous customers in-person to complete transactions, controlling and operating a network of automated kiosks in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside counties that converted cash to Bitcoin and vice versa, and conducting Bitcoin-for-cash transactions for unknown individuals who mailed large amounts of U.S. currency to him, including to post office boxes that he controlled.

Randol advertised his business on various websites, and he maintained a company website that falsely claimed his business was a fully compliantmoney services business that was registered with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a bureau of the United States Treasury Department. In fact, as Randol admitted in his plea agreement, he repeatedly violated federal law and his companys own AML policies by facilitating suspicious currency exchange transactions and taking steps to conceal them from law enforcement, including by failing to file required currency transaction reports and suspicious activity reports.

For example, Randol frequently conducted in-person cash transactions that exceeded $10,000 with anonymous or pseudo-anonymous individuals, including people who Randol knew only as Puppet Shariff, White Jetta, Aaavvv, Aaaa, Yogurt Monster, and Hood. In his plea agreement, Randol admitted to engaging in three specific transactions from October 2020 to January 2021 in which he exchanged a total of $273,940 in cash for Bitcoin without requesting a name, proof of identity, Social Security number, or any other information about the buyer or the source of the funds being exchanged. Such transactions violated the Bank Secrecy Act and his companys AML policy, which required, among other things, that he verify the identity of customers engaging in transactions over $9,999 by obtaining the customers full name, address, Social Security number, a verified phone number, and a photocopy of the customers official government identification.

While operating his crypto-exchange business, Randol also conducted hundreds of Bitcoin-for-cash transactions after receiving large cash shipments in the mail from anonymous individuals. In a typical transaction, an anonymous individual would text Randol using an encrypted platform to notify him that a parcel containing cash had been sent to a location that Randol controlled in or around Los Angeles. Once Randol received the parcel, he would count the money and send an equivalent amount of Bitcoin minus a commission to a digital wallet controlled by his customers. As with in-person transactions, Randol did not conduct any due diligence on the people mailing him large sums of cash, the source of funds being exchanged, or the purpose of the transaction.

When Randol received the packages, the cash was often packaged in a suspicious manner, including cash hidden inside childrens books, concealed inside fake birthday or holiday presents, buried within puzzle pieces, or wrapped within multiple magazines.

On June 5, 2019, FBI agents interviewed Randol about fraud proceeds that had been mailed to post office boxes he controlled. Two days later, Randol texted a customer stating that he would be taking a hiatus from converting cash parcels into cryptocurrency because he ran into an issue with [law enforcement]. But less than a week later, Randol resumed his cash parcels activity after that same anonymous customer asked Randol if he could exchange $10,000 in cash for Bitcoin.

Randol admitted that his failure to comply with Bank Secrecy Act requirements, including maintaining an effective AML program resulted in criminals using Randols business to launder millions of dollars of criminal proceeds. For example, between June 2018 and early 2020, Randol exchanged Bitcoin for cash that was mailed to him by a New Jersey resident who had been tricked into believing his grandson was facing criminal prosecution after purportedly killing an elderly woman in a traffic accident and that the money the victim was sending would be used to help the victims grandson with his legal problems. Based on these lies, the victim drained his savings and retirement accounts. While Randol did not participate in the fraud, his business converted the victims cash to cryptocurrency and sent it to various digital wallets without conducting any customer due diligence or investigating the source of the money he was receiving.

Because to Randols deficient AML practices, criminals were also able to structure and launder funds through his Bitcoin kiosks. Specifically, Randol operated numerous Bitcoin kiosks, which were in malls, gas stations, and convenience stores in cities such as Los Angeles, Glendale, Santa Clarita, Huntington Beach, Santa Ana, and Riverside.

But the setting on Randols kiosks allowed customers to structure funds to avoid currency reporting requirements by creating numerous accounts and by engaging in successive transactions involving up to $3,000. He also set up one or more test accounts that contained no customer information, which he allowed customers to use to complete kiosk transactions.

In September 2020, Randol hired a compliance officer for Digital Coin Strategies. Randol ignored this individuals advice to cease any use of test accounts for customer transactions on Bitcoin kiosks. Randol also continued to conduct in-person transactions, despite his compliance officers warning that doing so increased the risk that the cash or Bitcoin Randol was receiving was derived from an unlawful source.

The FBI and Homeland Security Investigations investigated this matter, with assistance from Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General, and the United States Postal Inspection Service.

Assistant United States Attorneys Ian V. Yanniello of the General Crimes Section and James E. Dochterman of the Asset Forfeiture and Recovery Section are prosecuting this case.

Read more:

Bitcoin-for-Cash Exchange Business Owner Agrees to Plead Guilty ... - Department of Justice