Agree, this sounds like a waste of the court's time and hopefully will be treated as such. "Investing" in digital currency is already a gamble, more so when it's a *meme coin.* If you're willing to gamble, you need to be willing to lose, and you need to be smart enough to know what you're gambling on, not just do it because some guy you don't even know hypes it up. That's on him. If he does by some chance win this (which, sadly, wouldn't surprise me), then if Dogecoin ever goes above the point where he and anyone else who partakes in the settlement would have made a profit, they should have to pay that profit to Musk. Only fair.

Elon didn't make you a moron, sue your parents maybe? No crypto has any inherent true value, it's all pure fantasy and speculation and hoping there will always be a greater fool to sell to at a higher price in the future. Maybe stick to investing in things that actually make useful products or provide valuable services and generate income for investors.

Quote from: Birddog37 on June 20, 2022, 20:36:17Someone, please change this guy's diapers!

People love lack of regulation when markets are growing. And then they cry wolf when they crash. This is exactly why we have regulation. Another matter could be so called stable coins. Sure, when you understand how algorithmic stable coins backed by so called cryptocurrency work, you know there are limits to their stability. But it could be argued that there was false marketing involved and fraud committed. When you're selling to retail investors, you should be careful with your marketing as those people often lack knowledge, experience, enjoy wishful thinking in copious amounts and are guided by greed. It's easy to sell them trash. People should remember that there is no profit without risk. If someone promises a big profit, it's extremely likely that there is also big risk, if it's not an outright scam.

And you're right. If he believed it's overvalued due to Musk's actions, nobody forced him to buy it. You can't internalize profits and externalize costs. If you want to pocket profits, you also have to cover costs when it goes south. And it will go south, that's just a matter of time. That's why you diversify.

Holy Cow! What a child this idiot is and of course it takes another idiot lawyer to file the suit. What Jackasses! This is what is wrong with this country. No responsibility...just blame some else. No one forced this dumbo....to buy Doge Coin. Now, this crybaby wants to be compensated! Someone, please change this guy's diapers! He stinks!

Quote from: AurianArchive on June 19, 2022, 22:58:03despite the mathematical constraints of caculatory overhead saying "it will not work as you know it."

Replacing trust is expensive. Which only goes to show that it is valuable.

At this point the only people not acknowledging that Digital Currencies started as an inverse-redirected pyramid scheme that were hijacked by Socialist Governments who saw the value in calculatory control...

And the only people not acknowledging that the scam is over and Digital Currencies were never practical at scale within the limits of known computational workloads...

Are those who sunk real money into Digital currencies and now face an "Amway" scenario. It's quite plausible these days to realize that "Amway" is an obscure joke only encountered in Mark Stanley's "Freefall" or Pete Abram's "Sluggy Freelance." As a brief recap: Amway was/is a "Multi-level" marketing / direct sales distribution network. It was investigated as a Ponzi Scheme, and there is little doubt that it was initially started as a Ponzi Scheme. Investors who bought into Amway were faced with a choice:

Option A: "accept their losses and move on"

Option B: Somehow make the legal application of the business model work.

Enough people chose Option B that Amway still exists with a line of viable internally developed products.

Digital Currency investors now face a similar option. They can either accept that they got scammed, eat their losses, and shut up...

or they can double down, reinvest, and "MAKE IT WORK!" ... despite the mathematical constraints of caculatory overhead saying "it will not work as you know it." If you suddenly did a head tilt because you failed advanced mathematical constraints 501 (not a real course), Mark Stanely had a good over-view of those constraints back in 2011. Start here: freefall.purrsia.com/ff2100/fc02057.htm

Payoff is here: freefall.purrsia.com/ff2100/fc02059.htm

With Option A being considered untenable as it is tantamount to admitting that you GOT scammed to begin with, and Option B being unrealistic as it's literally physically impossible...

that just leaves option C, aka the Socialist option, "It's got to be somebody ELSE'S fault and THEY MUST PAY!!!"

Courts tend to frown on claimants who waste the court's time trying mitigate extensive financial losses by suing someone else rather than owning up to the fiscal blunders.