Talk:Cryptocurrency/Archive 7

image
Seems the image is back, does this have consensus? keeps re-adding it, while wants it removed as well as. I believe we generally fall towards removal on copyright concern that the correct venue for this discussion is the noticeboard. HocusPocus00, I previously warned you on your talk page of WP:GS on these articles here User_talk:HocusPocus00. Please self-revert (and remove the logo) so you don't run afoul of sanctions. I appreciate having more editors on these crypto articles, but you must respect the existing consensus in place relating to reverts, and wikipedia policy. We are falling on the side of caution here on crypto, and that is intentional and we believe for the overall good of wikipedia. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've removed the image. I asked the user who stated there was a copyright issue to post the potential issue to the copyright noticeboard but I don't think they ever did. If we are uncomfortable with previous image, can we please discuss another image to use? HocusPocus00 (talk) 07:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's a commons image, I tagged it as having a faulty license claim there. - MrOllie (talk) 13:38, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2021
Found a replacement link for https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/bitcoin-the-cryptoanarchists-answer-to-cash/0 "Bitcoin: The Cryptoanarchists' Answer to Cash".IEEE Spectrum. Archived from the original on 4 June 2012. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6203968 Anglepapi9762 (talk) 11:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌. Well-intentioned, but the reference has an archive where the article content is publicly available. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 06:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Generic cryptocurrency symbol?
Is there a generic cryptocurrency symbol? Maybe ¢ or ₵ or ₡? --143.176.30.65 (talk) 16:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

"Safemoon" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Safemoon. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 23 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jalen Folf  (talk)  00:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2021
Typo: Crytocurrency instead of Cryptocurrency. This sentence "On 5 April 2021, The total market cap of Crytocurrency surpassed $2 trillion USD for the first time" Niekshas (talk) 14:42, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Deauthorized. (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2021 (2)
27.125.242.25 (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC) ❌ empty request. Shellwood (talk) 17:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Regarding "Cryptocurrency" revert on External_links of Market Cap and daily prices
MrOllie's "Cryptocurrency" revert

Dear

I was searching list of all Market Cap for all Cryptocurrencies in this Cryptocurrency, but only found the total Market Cap. I then searched internet, and found the following link is relevant to "Cryptocurrency".

It looks that the External_link Market Cap and daily prices of Cryptocurrencies is ok according to External_links:
 * "What can normally be linked
 * 3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues,[4] amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons.

Thanks. --Gluo88 (talk) 11:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , Given the amount of price and volume manipulation that regularly goes on in cryptocurrency markets, I don't accept that this site provides 'neutral and accurate material'. MrOllie (talk) 11:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * the investopedia article A Comparison of Cryptocurrency Price Trackers mentioned " CoinMarketCap is the cryptocurrency world's "go-to price checker for as long as anyone can remember," according to Bitcoin.com ".
 * this site is being used in Wikipedia for multiple items, including Dai_(cryptocurrency), Sherman3D
 * Therefore, it looks to be fine regarding to "neutral and accurate material" from my view.
 * What is the best way to resolve the difference between our views?
 * Or, may you or anyone know a better site for checking cryptocurrency market cap and prices for being used in this item?
 * Thanks. --Gluo88 (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think that it is better to recover my version as explained above. --Gluo88 (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I don't agree. This is a active page, let us wait to see if anyone else has an opinion. MrOllie (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * While I am sure coinmarketcap would love to have a great SEO external link the answer is absolutely not. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with the editors above in not including that external link. Coinmarketcap is run by Binance and the rankings are manipulated a bit. For example, some controversial currencies don't appear on the rankings at all like Hex. I think Wiki would need a completely neutral source. Hocus00 (talk) 19:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with the editors above in not including that external link. Coinmarketcap is run by Binance and the rankings are manipulated a bit. For example, some controversial currencies don't appear on the rankings at all like Hex. I think Wiki would need a completely neutral source. Hocus00 (talk) 19:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

What is and who can read the digital asset? Is it unique and permanent?
A prime number is a number that can only be divided by itself (and 1), an attribute making the number unique. Does efficient crypto mining (guessing a target hash to receive a currency reward) - highly simplified - need ever more and larger and larger unique numbers to keep make guessing hashes harder? But it is not the unique prime number that forms the so-called „digital asset“ that changes ownership in a crypto transaction. So what happens to new prime numbers, once „discovered“ (proven by calculated division with all prior prime numbers)? Are they written to a common (community) database, like the one maintained by the Uni of Tennessee? Are larger prime numbers that need more processing power, memory and energy to prove, store and process worth more than smaller prime numbers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:6CA1:BD00:80AC:121E:B501:F13C (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)


 * You have misunderstood, I'm afraid. Crypto mining is not prime number based, it is generally based on a one-way hash function. In Bitcoin's case it is SHA-256, which does some incorporate some prime numbers, but they are a fixed set known in advance. - MrOllie (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I am still puzzling about what the „digital asset“ is since there seems little value in guessing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:6CA1:BD00:80AC:121E:B501:F13C (talk • contribs)


 * The miner's proof of work output generally has no value at all. It is just there to prove that they did a difficult thing. Think of it like the inmates in an old prison movie moving rocks from one side of the yard to the other, and then back again. The 'value' for the miner is that if they find the correct answer first, they get to add some coins to their account on the ledger. - MrOllie (talk) 13:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I can see how such work deserves a service reward, but not that it augments the digital asset. In fact, I would consider the new coins inflation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:6CA1:BD00:80AC:121E:B501:F13C (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2021 (UTC)


 * There's a cap on the coins that are created this way. Essentially they're being paid from a reserve. The total number of Bitcoins is fixed at 21 million. Once the reserve is depleted, miners will be compensated from transaction fees. MrOllie (talk) 11:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, the cap applies only as long as you don’t overcome the 32 bit limitation. But some nifty programmers managed to squash the year 2000 bug in the end. My concern is different: real inflation caused by these virtually indestructible coins for the many, as long as they are considered convertible currency by a select few, infinitely convertible in any number of jurisdictions and never withdrawn from use. The only way out would appear to be to shut down the whole system, some day. But I appreciate feedback on other means.

crypto currency
It's invincible money this is only for showing on online and ... india is not apruve this currency... it's not money because this is only for fleeing it's have but this is not real money. ... when it's Velu up more and more purchase this crypto currency...... Kevallathiya21 (talk) 11:01, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * India is indeed one country that may have banned cryptocurrency, and I feel rightly so. But citizens of other jurisdictions can still exchange crypto (i.e. virtual convertible currency) to real currency in their jurisdiction and then convert to real Indian currency / legal tender. They can keep doing so every time and as long as someone is willing to part with some real currency in order to own digital asset. High volatility vs relatively stable real currency makes for attractive speculation: buy low, sell high. So every cryptocurrency that is convertible acts as a sink and issuing body for new real currency without removing cryptocurrency from circulation (1 real = 1 real + 1 virtual, every time). By aggregation, the real transactions are anonymized. You as an individual citizen definitively loses, or have to exit at the best terms offered, if you bought in and your country subsequently bans exchange. Ultimately, an unregulated system (crypto) - if allowed to exist, like cancer - wins over the regulated system (real currency) which has to put stability and the wellbeing of its citizens first. What is not helping is the fact that some governments are currently issuing enormous amounts of new fiat money to fuel investment. It becomes problematic for governments wanting to reign in inflation, as in Turkey. I wonder when there will be protests to the UN/IMF about this global scheme. (PS: Please make the title of your talk more specific to your message content or downgrade as a response to my talk, if that was your intention. Everything here is crypto...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:702F:1700:3D7E:2522:28B:764F (talk) 15:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Definition has issues
The definition has some issues - it seems to require decentralisation. While this is a common view amongst advocates of decentralised cryptocurrencies, it remains that a great many of the things that are called "crypto" or "cryptocurrency" in finance are not decentralised at all, e.g., permissioned-chain crypto-tokens or ICO tokens, that trade in the same markets on the same terms.

Who's Jan Lansky, and why is a definition he created for this one paper canonical?

The Merriam-Webster definition is cited, but not quoted: "any form of currency that only exists digitally, that usually has no central issuing or regulating authority but instead uses a decentralized system to record transactions and manage the issuance of new units, and that relies on cryptography to prevent counterfeiting and fraudulent transactions." The "usually" lets through things like XRP, Libra/Diem and ICO tokens.

Is there a better definition, from a reasonably authoritative source? Or several, preferably - the view from inside finance may be much broader than the view from inside cryptocurrency advocacy and development - David Gerard (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, searching Google Scholar on "cryptocurrency definition", I'm finding some pretty good cites that there is "no consistent definition". Still looking for a good cite that this is finance jargon (though it completely is, it would require synthesis to put it in the article - e.g., the range of topics covered in Bloomberg Crypto, say) - David Gerard (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree. Cryptography is just a digital technology. The issue is who holds (which) keys, what info is stored and processed (where) etc. This whole article should be downgraded and rewritten to generically explain application of cryptographic techniques in the context of digital currency, indicating various technical possibilities. Presumably there are published IEEE and ISO standards to refer to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:702F:1700:3D7E:2522:28B:764F (talk) 18:07, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Very subjective section
"As the popularity of and demand for online currencies has increased since the inception of bitcoin in 2009,[66] so have concerns that such an unregulated person to person global economy that cryptocurrencies offer may become a threat to society."

"Concerns" about what should be considered as a threat to society is different from different positions. Objectively everything can be interpreted as a threat to society. For example an anarchist, or an anarcho capitalist considers a government as a threat to society. A facist considers immigrants as a threat to society. A dogmatic idealist considers freedom of speech as a thread and so on. You can easily verify this by just watching mainstream news from different countries. USA media has a completely different threat model, then Russian, or Nigerian media and so on. And as no society is superior there is no way to decide.

My point is that statements like the one above are essentially void and only appears as to have meaning, while in fact they are just an additional layer of political manipulation. They constiute a certain point of view as objectiv truth. For that matter everyone who prefers an unregulated society would not consider cryptocurrencies as a threat but as a solution to the threat of regulations.

So at least one has to specify to whom exactly this is a threat. Certainly not to all of society. A great article would write something like: "cryptocurrencies might be considered as a threat to those parties, who prefer a centrally organized and regulated society, while libertarian people see them more as a possible solution to the currently existing hierachical, non democratic monetary system" ... Something like that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:ed:672a:a201:2936:f2f9:f212:2245 (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2019 (UTC)


 * You make your point eloquently. However, regardless of whether a concern is subjective, it can seem real for the person until disproved. It does not necessarily help to stigmatize people as libertarians and non-libertarians and defining how they act. My greatest concern is the danger caused by misinformation, lack of explanation and ignorance from risk and that people confuse what is real with what is virtual (and never the two shall meet). I am happy we have the talk page to every Wiki article, especially the complicated ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c22:b844:cb00:f9d6:444c:1761:7b7c (talk) 10:46, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Impossibility of conversion to capital asset
I miss an explanation how the cryptographic record is irrevocably und irretrievably deleted when a unit of cryptocurrency is converted into a physical monetary storage unit, like a coin or a banknote. Otherwise, either the crypto unit or the physical unit would be a fake and could theoretically be reconverted unlimited times, making it worthless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c23:6843:1800:8cff:fd27:ff7a:4e5d (talk) 16:46, May 10, 2021 (UTC)


 * It's actually not deleted. To convert into physical currency, you'd go through a clearing house / exchange of some type. They would buy your  cryptocurrency for physical currency, giving you the physical currency and they would have the cryptocurrency at that point.  It's not deleted, just changed hands.  Ravensfire  (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

That is a fundamental difference to how real money is managed: e.g. When people „move“ money between accounts at conventional banks, the money is deleted on one ledger and an equal amount of new money is created on the transaction partner‘s ledger (often in another institution and/or country). I believe this is double-entry bookkeeping. No history passes hands but capital is destroyed and created. What you describe for cryptocurrency is handing your ledger to another person, i.e. like giving away one of your bank accounts, or vice versa, being given another person‘s bank account, i.e. a record of transactions, not capital. Essentially it is impossible to convert cryptocurrency to physical currency, like going to the teller or ATM, because there is no controlled process to destroy the virtual record? Moreover, the electronic transaction records at real banks are periodically truncated (transactions older than one year struck from the electronic record) and the capital is usually guaranteed by the state (up to some maximum).

On the topic of exchange of virtual currency to real currency, I found useful considerations in this article. In this context, somebody should verify the important statement „there is no published mechanism to withdraw bitcoin from circulation“. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c23:6c4c:800:a05d:3a12:1df7:a273 (talk • contribs)


 * That's not what the term double-entry bookkeeping commonly means, that's a system for using expense and liability ledgers to keep track of what a business is spending money on. Re destruction of capital: Under the requirements you describe if I walked into a pawn shop and bought a gold coin with cash, the pawn shop would be required to shred the cash. - MrOllie (talk) 11:41, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

No. Both the (fiat) cash (being regulated, and by territorially enforced definition) and certainly the gold coin are real. Virtual currency (unregulated) is and always will be virtual, unless you can do miracles. Btw, I do not appreciate sabotage (i.e. your deletion) of my careful (qualified) edits in the Wikipedia article trying to explain the concept of virtual convertible currency in understandable terms. Maybe you can explain the mechanism by which a bitcoin can be destroyed? I can certainly explain to you how cash can be destroyed: legally by the central bank and illegally by me melting the coin or burning the bank note. The latter is sometimes done at funerals.

Wrt the ledger: I am no accountant, so maybe my terminology is not perfect. But the principle remains: in the real banking world, capital is not moved, it is destroyed and created in the named bank accounts of payor and payee, respectively. (Payor and payee are noted in the monthly statements for each party, but these are destroyed by the banks after a fixed legal retention period.) I cannot see this dual account separation with bitcoin which seems to record change of digital asset ownership in a single, albeit distributed and multiple copied, ledger. I am also not sure whether the money changers taking in and paying out real currency while passing along the virtual coins have been licensed to do this by the central banks and the records they are required by law to keep. Definitive references by jurisdiction appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c23:702f:1700:3d7e:2522:28b:764f (talk • contribs)


 * Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. If you add your personal opinions to an article without a reliable source to back up the information, you should expect that they will be removed. This is not sabotage. - MrOllie (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I indicated that I wanted help, not that I was wrong. And I was thinking of regular transactions, not computer hacks (like the 51% attack). Even an ATM can be busted and money stolen but since every banknote is uniquely numbered, it remains traceable. I have amended accordingly: „There is no published REGULAR mechanism to withdraw a unit of bitcoin from circulation (although bitcoin can be lost). Exchange of unregulated currency for legal tender would require permanent verifiable destruction (not change of ownership) of the digital asset unit and the issuance of regulated currency subject to territorial minting right. Otherwise, unlimited physical copies of a unique unregulated currency unit could be minted/printed or credited repeatedly in multiple territories.“ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c23:702f:1700:3d7e:2522:28b:764f (talk • contribs)


 * It does keep incorrect information out of Wikipedia, which is what I'm after. - MrOllie (talk) 18:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Please stop editing your comments after they have been replied to. This section is no longer an accurate record of discussion as it transpired. See Talk_page_guidelines. - MrOllie (talk) 11:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@ MrOllie: I have not changed the meaning of the discussion but „talk“ is not a normal sequential chat thread. Sometimes my meaning comes out wrong, so I correct „talking“ to „thinking“, „being“ to „believing“. And I am ok with people tracing changes. You are clever and powerful enough to take it :I — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:c23:744e:b700:959:296:21c4:2319 (talk • contribs)


 * This is considered to be rude by most people in the Wikipedia community, as you are making it look like we replied to one thing when in fact we replied to another. I, for one, will not be answering any more of your questions due to this. - MrOllie (talk) 11:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with Ollie, dont pretend that not following wikipedia norms is ok because of your personal view of it. Respect the process. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 14:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

just called 'coins'
In the lede, there may want to be a line that says that fintech tends to just identify cryptocurrencies as simply coins (no hyperlink). For example, just add 'coin' to the first sentence, as in: A cryptocurrency, crypto-currency, crypto, or coin is a...72.174.71.134 (talk) 15:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2021
I would reccommend adding this graphics in there: https://morethandigital.info/en/regulations-and-bans-what-threatens-crypto-bitcoin-co/ - Really intersting to see the possibilities of potential regulations and bans - by Prof. Dr. Patrick Schüffel and Markus Hammer BenTalin (talk) 13:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please make your request for a new image to be uploaded to Files For Upload. Once the file has been properly uploaded, feel free to reactivate this request to have the new image used. That said, the image would need to be compatible with Wikipedia's image use policy. The image doesn't appear to be freely licensed, so we probably cannot use it on Wikipedia. &#8209;&#8209; El Hef  ( Meep? ) 13:28, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

"Memecoin" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Memecoin. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 4 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 18:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Are NFT's worth discussing on page?
Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token

Possibly as a bullet point list we can include related Cryptocurrency technologies to capture the ever evolving landscape of Cryptocurrency technology. e.g. Proof of Stake, Proof of Work, NFT's, etc..

Or we can just include it under any technology section on the web page. I'm not that well versed in new technologies and how many there would be to justify adding NFT reference as a footnote or as part of a bigger bullet point list of emerging/existing Cryptocurrency technologies. SumeetJi (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I think this is worth discussing-perhaps just a brief mention of NFTs, what they are and how they have come to light over the last six months-if there are no objections I will commence writing this section.

Commodity or Security
Should the discussion of defining cryptocurrency as commodity or security or utility be developed for this article (or become a different, separate article closely linked to this article)? MaynardClark (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

There is no cryptocurrency called Ripple
″Ripple, which is often referred to as XRP" should be the other way around.

Netscr1be (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Pre-History
Could early forms of monetizable shibboleth verification used in ancient times be seen as a precursor to modern cryptocurrency? CessnaMan1989 (talk) 15:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

More recent source with specific figures about e-waste
The same author cited in the paragraph about e-waste has recently published a study also about Bitcoin and e-waste, this time with figures about annual e-waste generation and e-waste per Bitcoin transaction. It also discusses the relationship between the demand for mining hardware and semiconductor shortages. Perhaps the information would be worth adding to that paragraph?: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105901 - Pocchama393 (talk) 09:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2021
I believe there's an omission of sorts here:

Cryptocurrencies are generally fiat currencies, as they are not backed by or convertable into a commodity

People in the crypto-currency space very often differentiate between cryptocurrency and fiat currency in that fiat currencies are often overseen and regulated by governments and central banks, whereas crypto currencies are not.

Crypto-currency traders often refer to converting between crypto and fiat, which clearly does not align with the definition of fiat given on the wikipedia page.

I submit that it is important to mention this as its omission may lead to confusion for anyone operating in the crypto space. Microdotnet (talk) 10:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:09, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Why is there no "claimed benefits" section? (also a "drawback" one)
I wouldn't mind knowing what the supposed benefits are claimed to be (which should be phrased as "claimed benefits", rather than "benefits", as they haven't been proven, by any means. Not the ones I've heard about, that is …and if there are ones that have been proven, why haven't I heard of them? You'd have thought that the people who fervently believe in crypto currencies, would have made sure to tell everyone about it) …as well as a section for drawbacks, under which "Environmental impact" and "Technological limitations", and "Speculation, fraud and adoption" sections can be put.--213.113.123.236 (talk) 20:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Clear WP:POV in "Economic freedom" section
The "Economic freedom" section is written with a clear and firm conviction in cryptocurrency, and with a clear political bias. "Cryptocurrency presents major strides in economic growth and freedom to individuals such as in developing nations as well as those under economic sanctions." is a baseless and unverified claim …and it presents the prospect of being able to get around economic sanctions as an obvious good, which is clearly a controversial opinion. The same is true of how it, just as controversially, presents the lack of regulation as an obvious good. The bit where it says "to mine for cryptocurrency rewards to utilise, trade, and convert for common goods to survive." is rather bizarre, as people who struggle to survive, could hardly afford the amounts of computer power required for mining of crypto currency. The sentence "In countries with high inflation where fiat currency is no longer available to easily utilise to survive, many have turned to cryptocurrency working through online job boards to bypass strict regulations and achieve economic freedom." is also weird, as it not only ignores that crypto currencies are completely fiat currencies, but also ignores that such countries often just use a different country's (far more stable) currency instead. The whole section is just unverified and incoherent POV. Nothing more.--213.113.123.236 (talk) 20:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2021
The first sentence is extremely long. Please change it to:

A cryptocurrency, crypto-currency, or crypto is a collection of binary data which is designed to work as a medium of exchange. Individual coin ownership records are stored in a ledger, which is a computerized database using strong cryptography to secure transaction records, to control the creation of additional coins, and to verify the transfer of coin ownership.

In case my request isn't clear, here is what I'm asking you to do.

72.77.42.118 (talk) 11:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ SSSB (talk) 10:27, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2021
GPU price rise An increase in cryptocurrency mining increased the demand for graphics cards (GPU) in 2017.[57] (The computing power of GPUs makes them well-suited to generating hashes.) Popular favorites of cryptocurrency miners such as Nvidia's GTX 1060 and GTX 1070 graphics cards, as well as AMD's RX 570 and RX 580 GPUs, doubled or tripled in price – or were out of stock.[58] A GTX 1070 Ti which was released at a price of $450 sold for as much as $1100. Another popular card GTX 1060's 6 GB model was released at an MSRP of $250, sold for almost $500. RX 570 and RX 580 cards from AMD were out of stock for almost a year. Miners regularly buy up the entire stock of new GPU's as soon as they are available.[59]

In 2021, NVIDIA has asked retailers to do what they can when it comes to selling GPUs to gamers instead of miners. "Gamers come first for Nvidia," said Boris Böhles, PR manager for Nvidia in the German region.[60] NVIDIA added Low Hash Rate (LHR) cards to their line-up. These cards were to be lower priced and more readily available to gamers. Unfortunately, this campaign has been a total failure as these cards are still sought after by miners and still achieve mining profits that are 80-90% of the Non-LHR cards. As of November 2021, prices of GPUs are 200-300% more than MSRP. It is expected that GPU prices will only go down if Bitcoin and Etherium prices drop to the point where mining is no longer profitable. Goldberg1972 (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * This paragraph seems like a complaint against miners. I don't think the detail about specific price raises is necessary, and makes it seem like the editor is very biased against miners. Any suggestions are welcome. Gargantuan Brain (talk) 21:07, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Proof stake instead of proof of work in opening discussio?
Most major cryptocurrencies still use proof of work and not proof of stake. Using only PoS in the opening example therefore feels like a calculated partial-truth to avoid one of the controversial aspects of that is currently overwhelmingly present in the technology. 2601:191:8403:5FC0:4411:3401:258A:59DD (talk) 08:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2021
Under the section "Increased regulation in 2021" add actions of state legislatures after the request of Elizabeth Warren to the SEC. Namely:

"17 states enacted legislation or adopted resolutions involving Cryptocurrency regulation in 2021. "

This source could be useful going forward if there is no federal regulation in the US. Aaronlearns (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thanks! Hemantha (talk) 08:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2022
please change "Ripple ($XRP) is the world's most energy efficient cryptocurrency, using 0.0079 kilowatt-hours of electricity per transaction." to "Nano ($XNO) is the world's most energy efficient cryptocurrency, using 0.000112 kilowatt-hours of electricity per transaction."

Source: https://medium.com/@to96alice/nano-is-green-energy-81387a4fe83e Related Website Page(s): https://nano.org/sustainability 81.167.79.54 (talk) 16:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Medium posts are not reliable sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi. We would need reliable secondary sources about this (Medium is not allowed), we can't use their homepage for that claim (see WP:ABOUTSELF, particularly the first point: "the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim"). Thanks. BeŻet (talk) 17:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Move some content from "Bitcoin" to "Cryptocurrency"
I think that the Bitcoin and Bitcoin subsections should be moved here (unless they apply to Bitcoin only). Reasoning:
 * Most of that content explicitly applies to all cryptocurrencies (or at least all proof-of-work cryptocurrencies), for instance:
 * Bitcoin, along with other cryptocurrencies, has been described as an economic bubble
 * In January, 2022, the Central Bank of Russia proposed to ban "all cryptocurrency issuance
 * The same month, Erik Thedéen [sv], vice-chair of the European Securities and Markets Authority, called for an EU ban on proof of work crypto-mining
 * According to a 2020 report produced by the United States Attorney General's Cyber-Digital Task Force illicit uses of cryptocurrency typically fall into three categories
 * Blockchain analysis company Chainalysis concluded that illicit activities like cybercrime, money laundering and terrorism financing made up only 0.15% of all crypto transactions
 * Cryptocurrency already points to Legality of bitcoin by country or territory and Cryptocurrency to Bitcoin
 * The current situation is the legacy of the time when Bitcoin was the first and only cryptocurrency. Today, Bitcoin is one out of 17,032 and it represents "only" 40% of the total crypto-ecosystem market capitalization
 * There is no reason to single out Bitcoin (unless reliable sources specifically do so). For instance, Ethereum is largely subject to the same regulations and criticisms as Bitcoin does but the words "legal", "tax", "crime", "energy", "carbon"... do not appear in that article.

I opened a discussion about that issue here as well: Talk:Bitcoin.

Does anyone object to that? A455bcd9 (talk) 14:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * As I indicated at the Bitcoin talk page, this seems the logical thing to do.Selfstudier (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree. A. C. Santacruz &#8258; Please ping me! 15:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you.
 * I also think that the section "Increased regulation in 2021" should be moved to Legality of cryptocurrency by country or territory and maybe summed up in one sentence in "History" (for example: "In 2021, the rise in the popularity of cryptocurrencies and their adoption by financial institutions led several governments to enact new cryptocurrency regulations.") It's unclear why we have a whole section about regulation... in 2021 only! (even though that section also contains 3 paragraphs about regulation in... 2020?). Countries in this section seem cherrypicked.
 * What do you think about that? A455bcd9 (talk) 05:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd move and generalize to "Increasing Regulation" as a separate sub, I am pretty sure it is going to do nothing but increase.Selfstudier (talk) 13:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/thailand-joins-global-peers-in-adding-controls-on-digital-assets Selfstudier (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course it's gonna increase, but we will not list the 200+ countries regulating cryptocurrencies on this page, will we?
 * Also, most of these articles are about proposed regulations. There's a long way to go before these regulations are enacted. For instance, the proposed Russian ban was much talked about but it seems the Finance Minister is against it. Per WP:NOTNP, I don't think we should mention them all extensively in this article (compared to Legality of cryptocurrency by country or territory). A455bcd9 (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you missed the part of my comment where I said "I'd move", I was agreeing with you about that.Selfstudier (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah sorry! (I understood as "I'd move to a separate sub called "Increasing Regulation" in the current Cryptocurrency article"...) All good then. A455bcd9 (talk) 11:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Should the metaverse be added to this page?
Although it is a generally new topic I feel the metaverse deserves to be mentioned as it is becoming more relevant. They are directly related since cryptocurrencies will be used in the metaverse to buy things. In addition they are used to buy NFT's (which should also be mentioned) which will also be brought to the metaverse. With the way the world is going I think it is important to mention where it is now and what it might be like in the future.

Tun39057 (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * "the metaverse"? Is this a reference to Facebook/Meta? Do they have a patent on this terminology? Anyway, this article is mainly about the technology itself not specifically where you can shop with cryptocurrency although it might be worth a mention in the adoption section if and when it becomes a reality, we don't do crystal ball in WP. Selfstudier (talk) 09:12, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It may be worth mentioning generally the uses for cryptocurrencies as a medium of exchange, but you wouldn't write things like "buying something from John Lewis" in Money. I feel like this metaverse vis-a-vis cryptocurrency example is the same thing as that, more or less. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't think it should. It's largely unrelated, even if some journalists bundle it together with crypto for some reason. BeŻet (talk) 11:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Coinmarketcap
The FT has pointed out potential problems with Coinmarketcap, such as https://www.ft.com/content/5f68b7b5-da81-44f0-a3d8-766ff1191cde But the FT, WSJ, Barron’s, The Times, Newsweek, Time, etc, continue to use the site (recent examples listed below). Google Scholar suggets 162 papers have cited it so far this year. Even after a century, problems still crop up with market indices. The S&P and FTSE stock indexes have been revised many times. S&P credit ratings exacerbated the 2007 financial crisis, giving AAA ratings to dodgy CDOs. But the answer has been to seek reform or encourage more competition, not ban them. There have to be similar services for crypto, and these are an important element in Wikipedia pages. Coinmarketcap may not be perfect, but it’s the most commonly used crypto benchmark. General problems should be identified on its Wikipedia page. It seems ridiculous not to use it, or not propose a substitute. https://www.ft.com/content/7a37d891-db34-43a6-9ec9-ac9e0a5a1477 https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-urges-mcdonalds-to-accept-dogecoin-for-payment-11643119209 https://www.barrons.com/articles/cryptos-bitcoin-google-blockchain-51642710384 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/twins-to-ride-friendly-currents-with-gemini-trust-nkkzpj7vx https://www.newsweek.com/cardano-price-update-what-sundaeswap-exchange-bitcoin-crypto-1670073 https://time.com/nextadvisor/investing/cryptocurrency/altcoins/IOHKwriter (talk) 12:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Open source vs Free Software
Open source is usually a diluted version of Free Software such as software released under BSD or MIT licenses. It's actually Free Software. I see the edit button is disabled. - Anonymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.219.79.223 (talk) 15:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Use in Russia
It appears to be used in Russia to avoid the declining ruble and scansions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.173.76.19 (talk) 09:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Updated Dates
Many of the dates in the begining of the article are outdated, anyone agree? 2020 is old man! BlatentBen (talk) 22:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The blockchain: It is important to present the blockchain mechanism and its specificities, this new technology in which a record of transactions made are maintained across several computers that are linked in a peer-to-peer network, Thanks to the blockchain technology the cryptocurrencies are irreversible and immutable. The cryptocurrencies could not be rewrite or move funds except for the owner and all the transaction written on the block chain. The mining process allows to the cryptocurrencies have a limited and pre-determined supply that is coded into its underlying algorithm when it is created.

The viability impacting factors When we talk about the viability of a cryptocurrencies it is good to stick to some notion like: Security: that guarantee the safety of its design and reliability Stability: the stability comes when the cryptocurrencies or the currency in general is used, that means a future stable currency is a currency that grows in the market and increase its demand. Supply: the demand increases could be a good sign of cryptocurrencies stability, but if there is no offer this is a threat to the viability of the cryptocurrencies. This technology seems to be secure and viable nonetheless it consumes a lot of energy to process in this case the viability question will not came by security or stability but from the environment impact came from the sustainability, especially in a world where the awareness about the climate changes and environmental aspects is increasing and take important place in the public policies. The Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index indicates that Bitcoin, the most widely-mined cryptocurrency network, uses 122.87 Terawatt-hours of electricity every year—more than the Netherlands, Argentina, or the United Arab Emirates. The cryptocurrency characteristics The first aspect with cryptocurrencies is decentralization, the peer-to-peer transaction without any intervention of a financial authority or institution. “In this system, centralized intermediaries, such as banks and monetary institutions, are not necessary to enforce trust and police transactions between two parties” in Investopedia January 11, 2022. Since there is no need for a central authority, users do not need to identify themselves when transacting and keep them anonymous. In addition to that a decentralized structure, facilitate payment transfers and reduce the money transfer cost. The decentralization and suppression of higher authority will demine the role of authorities and governments and this may create a legal problem for the viability of the blockchain. According to the freeman law “transactions conducted on blockchain offer greater privacy than transactions conducted on traditional platforms. But this advantage poses a complex jurisdictional challenge”. Cryptocurrencies may be considered as alternative currencies, but still the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) treats them as a financial asset or property. The volatility aspect hinders hinder the trust of users “the price for one token rose from fractions of a dollar to $0.09. Since then, its price has increased by tens of thousands of dollars—sometimes rising or falling thousands of dollars within days” Investopedia January 2022. The comparison between the dollar and the bitcoin Both the dollar and the bitcoin have no proper value they just have an exchange value, although the dollar is backed by the state “the US GOVERNEMENT”, in this and this create a demand itself but also an authority regulator. The blockchain technology make every transaction visible, this assures transparency although the value of the bitcoin relies only on the offer and demand of the bitcoin without any organism that they could rely on. The FDA can create unlimited amount of money, unlike the dollar the bitcoins number is limited and capped at 21 million. “Unlike “classical” fiat currencies where central banks create money in, theoretically, unlimited amounts, the total number of Bitcoins is limited and capped at 21 million. This is one fundamental difference” Dirk G. Baur & Thomas Dimpfl article published in January 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.193.16.66 (talk) 11:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Edit request to "Price Trends" section
The claim is made, "Bitcoin's value is largely determined by speculation among other technological limiting factors known as block chain rewards coded into the architecture technology of Bitcoin itself." I believe this is partly true, but incomplete, since the speculation about Bitcoin's value also includes social and cultural factors. I would recommend something like, "Bitcoin's value is largely determined by speculation about either technological limiting factors such as block chain rewards, or about social and cultural factors such as privacy and anonymity, free trade, human rights, and various related beliefs of social and cultural significance (from "Sources of Cryptocurrency Value Systems: The Case of Bitcoin", url https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2020.1806469). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.246.204 (talk) 06:28, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

"bitcoin" mentioned 244 times in the article
This article needs a major rewrite to remove nearly all of the references to bitcoin. The article should be about cryptos in general and not focus heavily on any one crypto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HmmInterdasting (talk • contribs) 04:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Bitcoin has always been the dominant cryptocurrency, and it dominates the coverage of cryptocurrencies in reliable sources as well. You are welcome to point to significant coverage in reliable sources of cryptocurrencies as a broad topic that does not include coverage of Bitcoin. Good luck with that. Cullen328 (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2022
Please remove

the Chinese government declared all cryptocurrency transactions of any kind illegal

and add

the Chinese government prohibited all cryptocurrency transactions of any kind

It's shorter, and the verb's all in one place, without the words in the middle of "declared illegal". 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Illegal is more precise. Something can be prohibited but not be illegal. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Should cryptoasset have a separate article?
Right now this term redirects here (ditto for cryptoassets), but it maybe both broader and notable. Thoughts? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * That could make sense, we already make the distinction in Wikidata: crypto-actif (Q13479982) and cryptocurrency (Q13479982). The distinction could build on the work done by the ECB on the subject. Maxlath (talk) 16:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Bank of England thinks its a synonym but then https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-sets-out-plan-to-make-uk-a-global-cryptoasset-technology-hub
 * I didn't look into it too closely, the term is certainly out there but perhaps there is no consensus on what it actually means.
 * Digital asset "A digital asset is anything that exists only in digital form and comes with a distinct usage right." Hmm.
 * Selfstudier (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU22 - Sect 202 - Tue
— Assignment last updated by Sqlo123 (talk) 20:45, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

"A cryptocurrency, crypto-currency, or crypto"?
I have literally never heard anybody refer to an individual token as "a crypto". The term is used broadly in reference to cryptocurrency in general ("he just bought a bunch of crypto"), but never once have I seen it used as a singular noun ("Solana is a crypto"). Is there a citation for this bizarre claim in the lead, or can it be removed? I am asking here since this seems like a fairly contentious article where people will get mad if I just swoop in and edit the lead. jp×g 20:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Reversions
Hello @Praxidicae, you have reverted 8 changes I made yesterday, with a comment 'wording was more neutral and accurate before'. This is not very helpful. The major change was to add a paragraph about problems with information on crypto – this has been a source of debate within Wikipedia and is a reason why Coinmarketcap is banned. The criticism and new sources are from RSs, the WSJ and the FT. (The WSJ has also launched a newsletter, but I can find no independent coverage about this.) You have also reintroduced a dead link (which I had replaced with an RS) and a poorly written sentence that does not make sense: '...scanners to read government-issued identification such as a driver's license or a passport to confirm users' identities'. This is a big page to start improving and I feel it is best done from the bottom up by improving each section. Please clarify your changes. GreyStar456 (talk) 08:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Why would anyone use cryptocurrency?
This article ought to answer that question. But it doesn't (unless I'm missing something, which is entirely possible). What is its purpose? What makes it preferable to conventional currency? I can hazard some guesses, but the article should explain this. With inline references to reliable sources, of course. Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 17:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Unless reliable sources widely report on it being "preferable to conventional currency", we won't be including that. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course.I guess I didn't express myself clearly. To be more precise, is there any information available from reliable sources that explains why people choose to use cryptocurrency when conventional money is readily available? Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @User:Praxidicae, here's a start: "The cryptocurrency market... allows companies to raise money without engaging with venture capitalists and to be traded without listing on stock exchanges." This is just a shot in the dark. I know almost nothing about cryptocurrency. I just happen to subscribe to the journal quoted. Anybody with more knowledge want to weigh in and expand? BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "Crypto furnishes certain options that are simply not available with fiat currency. For example, programmable money can enable real-time and accurate revenue-sharing while enhancing transparency to facilitate back-office reconciliation.... Crypto provides a new avenue for enhancing a host of more traditional Treasury activities, such as enabling simple, real-time, and secure money transfers...Crypto could enable access to new capital and liquidity pools through traditional investments that have been tokenized, as well as to new asset classes." BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "Cryptocurrency could become a legitimate way of hedging sophisticated investors’ portfolios, like other alternative assets such as wine or gold." BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 14:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think any such section would need to concentrate on crypto's uses and potential uses as an alternative to conventional currency rather than its use as a fungible asset. This is an important issue because at present it could be argued that crypto is fundamentally no different from gold bars in its behaviour and use, despite being digital etc Sbishop (talk) 15:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

more read — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taraa19 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Good background, but I suspect a blog post isn't going to qualify as a reliable source. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 12:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The edits I just made incorporate explanations from a NY Times story that helped me understand the utility of crypto, and a Wall St. Journal story that further supports existing statements about anonymity. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 201 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by Ruizhouruizhou (talk) 04:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Please be advised that on all cryptocurrency articles we are only using top shelf WP:RS such as NYT, bloomberg, wsj, fortune.com, etc. We are not using any type of contributor articles (such as forbes contributors), blogs, cryptocurrency websites such as coindesk, etc. Thank you Jtbobwaysf (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2023
https://www.technicalsadi1.com/2023/02/today-crypto-box-best-codes-earn-more.html 39.61.124.217 (talk) 08:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Outdated Transaction Fees for Ether and Bitcoin.
The current article shows the median transaction fees for Ether and Bitcoin using data from September 2018. I can update this to reflect data from February 2023. However, the transaction fees for cryptocurrencies fluctuate frequently, so I wonder if it's even necessary to include the current median transaction fee. Does this information provide any meaningful value to the article? Official Owens (talk) 19:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2022 (2)
In the environmental impact section, three lines (Cardano, Polkadot, and Solana) begin with hyphens. Please replace them with bullets. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ — Sirdog (talk) 22:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)78.173.128.229 (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Cryptocurrencies
Introduction: Cryptocurrencies have emerged as a new form of digital asset that has disrupted the traditional financial landscape. A cryptocurrency is a digital or virtual currency that uses cryptography for security, making it difficult to counterfeit or double-spend. Cryptocurrencies operate independently of a central bank, and their transactions are recorded on a decentralized ledger called a blockchain. In this article, we will delve into the history, technology, and impact of cryptocurrencies. &#34;Talhamalik2&#34; (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Contradiction?
From the intro: "Despite their name, cryptocurrencies are not considered to be currencies in the traditional sense, and while varying treatments have been applied to them, including classification as commodities, securities, and currencies, cryptocurrencies are generally viewed as a distinct asset class in practice". This seems to be a contradiction. Jack Upland (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The basic issue is simulacra. Money is not property, it just has the similarity of property, as people are willing to act as if it is property. Crypto has the similarity of money, but that's where copy of copy fades to the point of no longer capturing the essence of the original.
 * The fine point here is that crypto is not money because John Q. Public doesn't act as if its property. Some people are trying to convince Mr. Public that their new crypto stuff is better than the currency he currently uses, for whatever motive. If they would succeed, it would become money.
 * As people trying to convince other people crypto is property (commodity), or at least represents property (that what currency and securities are), people are trying to figure out what class of assets it belongs. The correct answer is its in the same asset class as monopoly money. 2A10:8012:21:5838:FD07:2EEF:FEDE:3C8D (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Additional information for "Increasing regulation" in the U.S.
Currently, in the "Increasing regulation" section has limited information on the developments in cryptocurrency regulation in the United States. I am planning to add a few additional timelines here. This includes the approval of the first Bitcoin ETF, the U.S. Treasury Department's proposal for businesses dealing in cryptocurrencies to report certain transactions to the IRS, and the White House's Comprehensive Framework for Responsible Development of Digital Assets. I believe that adding this information is significant as it provides related developments in the evolving regulation of cryptocurrency in the U.S. CookieBasket (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Recent Events for "Legality"
Most of the events in the section are before 2022, and many more events have happened since then. I am thinking of updating the section by adding more current events to the section. However, I am aware that there exists the cryptocurrency and crime link that is updated more regularly, so I am unsure of whether I should update the "Money Laundering" subsection or the "Loss, theft, and fraud" subsection. Sparkkr (talk) 22:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)