VeriTokenHolder

Underpromising and overdelivering is a Veritaseum mantra that goes back before commercial AI was available.. back to the $veri token. I was not defrauded by Reggie Middleton!

"SmartMetal Vibes" Music Video youtu.be/hErG1dPLS1Q?si… via @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @Veritaseuminc @VeTest_2017 @VeriTokenHolder @QuantumMetals

The government calls us “the defrauded”. “The defrauded” are the ones that filed these Bar Complaints against government attorneys. 100s of them. More than participated in the government run “fair fund”. They had an effect… wsj.com/finance/curren…

I agree, the most important work does lie ahead. Please fix this egregious mistake as soon as possible. Token holders are awaiting SEC’s reply in 5 attorneys involved here. Complaints referred from New York AGC to SEC OGC. The AGC maintained jurisdiction on the 6th attorney. Let’s get serious about clarity, integrity, AND accountability. courtlistener.com/docket/1604525…

@SovereignRiz @zkMarkAllen It’s a banger!!

New tune to take us into the weekend. "SmartMetal Vibes" Enjoy everyone and thank you all for the tremendous amount of support and have an amazing weekend!

🎶Bone Thugs-n-Harmony released 'Tha Crossroads' 30 years ago, April 30, 1996

@inneroperator @santiagoroel @inversion_cap Ask: who owns the infrastructure. There you will find beneficiaries. x.com/documentingbtc…

The biggest beneficiaries of crypto adoption might not be the tokens themselves, they might be public companies with actual cash flows that almost nobody is talking about. After my conversation with Santiago (@santiagoroel), Founder and CEO of Inversion (@inversion_cap) on Memes and Markets, I started rethinking how to actually capture the upside of stablecoins and tokenization going mainstream. Public companies like PayPal, Visa, Mastercard, JP Morgan, BlackRock, are all already in. Here's what I'm thinking and how I'm approaching it👇

@lisamightydavis @USPS Where to first? 😎

Guess what we are all getting at our local @USPS ?

@CsTominaga veridao.io/page/declarati… Would be happy for you to sign it Craig.

We are in a war. Not a metaphor, not a flourish, not an exaggeration uttered for effect — a war in the truest, starkest sense. A war for freedom. A war for humanity itself. A war in which the battlefield is invisible, the weapons are abstractions, and yet the consequences are more tangible than steel. This is a war over the future of ownership — the future of whether a man shall own himself or merely lease the illusion from those who presume to rule him. Digital cash is not a toy, nor a trend, nor some glimmering novelty for speculators to boast about. Digital cash is the hinge upon which civilisation now turns. It can create a world where the individual stands sovereign — unmediated, unchained, unobserved — holding in his hand the power once reserved for states. Or it can cement a future where every transaction is monitored, every transfer censored, every asset callable at the whim of the keeper. It can liberate us, or it can enslave us. There is no middle ground. This is binary — a choice between autonomy and subjugation. And do not pretend that we drift gently toward either future. We are dragged. Contested. Resisted. Revolted against and besieged. Whether one invokes the grey tyranny of Orwell or the soft suffocation of Huxley, the point remains: the world stands on the edge of something unprecedented, and it will fall one way or the other. One side will win. The other will be erased. If the aim is freedom, then the individual must be empowered. Unconditionally. Irreversibly. If the aim is dominion — if you want overlords, rulers, custodians, watchers — then stop worrying now. Abandon the idea of peer-to-peer exchange. Abandon the notion that a human being should hold his own wealth without permission. Abandon the idea that the protocol should scale so that all of humanity can transact at once. For slavery is always the easier road; it requires only that you capitulate. But if freedom is the aim, then understand the principle: a digital cash system must let a person hold their money. Not a voucher. Not an IOU. Not a synthetic derivative locked behind watchtowers, liquidity gates, or shadow-banking intermediaries. Actual possession. Actual control. A system where assets, records, property titles, timestamped documents — all of it — can be exchanged instantly, directly, peer-to-peer, without middlemen in the middle of every breath a citizen takes. No watchtowers monitoring your channels like wardens in digital towers. No liquidity providers holding the rails like feudal lords of abstraction. No protocol gateways that quietly siphon authority from the individual to the machinery of institutional custodianship. No compulsory node-running masquerading as “sovereignty.” No lightning-wrapped illusions designed precisely to keep the user in the position of permanent tenant. Just cash. Digital cash. Handed from one person to another. Simple. Direct. Human. Free. That — not the technocratic labyrinth, not the pseudo-anarchist theatre, not the custodial IOUs dressed up as rebellion — is what this war is about. And understand this: the opposition is not symbolic. The adversary is not theoretical. At stake are trillions upon trillions of dollars in yearly rents extracted by middlemen who have convinced the world that their parasitism is essential. Visa. Mastercard. BlackRock. The banking cartels. The fintech giants. The entire structure thrives upon the idea that every human action must be routed through them so they may take their tribute. Their profits depend on you never holding your own assets. Their empire depends on you never controlling your own keys. Their dominion depends on you believing that “ownership” can be rented. They take percentages of every dollar spent. Not millions. Not billions. But hundreds of trillions flowing through their hands every year. And you think they will give this up politely? You think they will allow genuine peer-to-peer exchange — without intermediaries — to flourish without unleashing every lie, every narrative, every smear, every pressure campaign, every bought academic and manufactured consensus? People go to war for less than what is threatened here. Nations go to war for less. Empires fall for less. So do not doubt for a moment that this is a war. A war dressed in the clothing of technology, but rooted in the ancient struggle between those who wish to rule and those who refuse to kneel. And when they whisper: “Trust Lightning.” “Trust the intermediaries.” “You don’t need to own your money.” “You don’t need to hold your assets.” “Rent your property.” “Rent your goods.” “Rent your identity.” “Let us handle it for you.” Understand the translation: Do not worry about your freedom. We’ll manage that too. This is the moment where civilisation chooses its future. Either individuals reclaim the right to own value directly — to control their wealth without permission — or the world slides into a future where every citizen is monitored, managed, and monetised. There is no neutrality in this. There is no comfortable middle. There is only victory or submission. And I, for one, choose the war for freedom.

@SovereignRiz @pumpius Folks, take notes! 📝 #RespectTheIP

In short, you’re correct that this Veritaseum family is a foundational reference that Ripple itself cited multiple times with overlapping language. It adds nuance to the moat narrative: Ripple’s edge comes from its specific, patented ODL/interoperability layer on top of broader prior art, not from owning the entire concept of trustless transfers. If you have the exact "literal language" excerpts or specific foundational prior-art patents you’re comparing (beyond this family), share them for a deeper claim-by-claim breakdown. -- @grok What about foundational patents that Ripple cited at least 6 times that has the literal language in the US11196566B2 Patent family. Thoughts In short, yes—this Veritaseum family is a heavily cited foundational piece that Ripple explicitly referenced multiple times in its own filings. It highlights how blockchain payment innovation builds cumulatively rather than in isolated silos. Ripple's XRPL/ODL patents add specific value but operate in a space with earlier (and widely referenced) work like this. If you're asking about potential overlap, licensing implications, or claim charting between these families, more details on specific Ripple claims would help refine that.US11196566B2 (and its patent family) is a Veritaseum Inc. / Reginald Middleton patent—not a Ripple one. It covers devices, systems, and methods for low-trust or zero-trust value transfers using decentralized digital currencies (e.g., blockchain protocols like Bitcoin or Ethereum). The core idea enables parties to enter conditional value transfer agreements (swaps, letters of credit, collateralized transfers, etc.) over distances without traditional intermediaries or high trust. It uses mechanisms like:"Inchoate" (partially signed) transaction records created by a facilitator. Multi-signature commit/refund/disburse transactions. External data sources (oracles/APIs) for conditional disbursement (e.g., price feeds, delivery status). Timelocks, substitution of parties, mediators, and on-chain embedding of terms (e.g., via OP_RETURN or similar). Filed in 2015 (priority 2014), granted in 2021. It's part of an international family with continuations and foreign counterparts. Veritaseum has asserted it (e.g., against Coinbase), and it survived an IPR challenge patents google. These are the "foundational patents" you're referring to. The Veritaseum family (centered on US11196566B2) is widely viewed in some crypto communities as foundational to trustless/DeFi-style value transfers, smart contract-like conditional logic on blockchains, and oracle-driven disbursements. It has 155+ forward citations (patents that cite it), including heavy use by nChain (~105 times), Mastercard (multiple), and others. Proponents (including Veritaseum and community accounts like@SovereignRiz) argue it underpins broad swaths of crypto flows, tokenized assets, stablecoins, and cross-ledger transfers. Ripple (specifically Ripple Luxembourg S.A.) has cited this family at least 7 times. Google Patents shows at least these Ripple-assigned patents (all in their "resource transfer system" family, which overlaps with payment/liquidity/ODL-related tech) cite US11196566B2 or its family members: US10740732B2 (Resource transfer system) US11386415B2 (Hold condition in a resource transfer system) US11392944B2 (Transfer costs in a resource transfer system) US11392955B2 (Temporary consensus networks in a resource transfer system) US11481771B2 (One way functions in a resource transfer system) US11367072B2 (Private networks and content requests in a resource transfer system) This matches your "at least 6 times." These citations appear because Ripple's patents reference the prior art on conditional/low-trust transfers, data-driven conditions, consensus mechanisms, and related blockchain value exchange concepts when building their specific implementations patents google. On "literal language" in the US11196566B2 patent family: The Veritaseum specification and claims use precise terminology (e.g., commit transactions with multi-sig conditions, disbursement functions referencing external data sources, refund/expiration logic, facilitator roles, inchoate records, party substitution, collateral handling) that overlaps conceptually—and in some cases phrasing—with later blockchain payment patents. When Ripple cites it, their filings acknowledge relevance to similar trustless/conditional transfer mechanisms. Exact "literal" copying of claim language isn't the norm (patents avoid that to differentiate), but shared technical language around decentralized value transfers, oracle conditions, and on-ledger enforcement appears across the cited Ripple patents and the Veritaseum family. This is standard in patent prosecution for prior art. How this relates to the earlier XRPL/Ripple moat discussion (vs. SWIFT or rivals):Ripple's specific patents (e.g., US10,902,416 on ODL/digital asset bridging and US11,998,003 on ledger interoperability) are narrower, targeted implementations for cross-border payments with XRP/ODL flows. They can still provide defensive/offensive IP value. However, the broader foundational concepts of low/zero-trust conditional value transfers (as in Veritaseum's work) are cited by Ripple itself, meaning Ripple's tech builds on or distinguishes from this prior art. This limits how "insurmountable" any single company's moat is—competitors (including SWIFT's DLT pilots with ISO 20022, shared ledgers, and interoperability) can design around specific claims without infringing exact Ripple implementations. Citing a patent doesn't mean infringement or licensing; it's disclosure of relevant prior art. Veritaseum's portfolio has been positioned as potentially covering wide swaths of DeFi/crypto settlement (per their statements and community analysis), but validity, claim scope, and enforceability would be decided in litigation or examination.

RIPPLE’S XRP PATENT BLOCKED SWIFT FROM BUILDING ANY RIVAL CHAIN! GAME OVER FOR SWIFT 🔥 XRPL PATENT BLOCKS RIVALS FROM BUILDING ANYTHING CLOSE While everyone’s scrambling to copy the XRP Ledger… they can’t. Swift? They’re locked out. No replication possible. The ONLY path forward? Integrate Ripple’s technology. This is the moment XRP holders have been waiting for. The moat just got wider. The future of global finance? Built on XRPL. Want the real alpha, leaks, and updates before the masses? 👉 Follow t.me/alexanderthewh… right now for the uncensored Ripple/XRP intel! Don’t get left behind. The whale is feeding. 🐳💰

@pumpius Tell that to @ReggieMiddleton and his patent(s) that @Ripple, @ethereum and virtually every other project out there that transfers value knowingly violated. See some of @SovereignRiz threads...

Bitcoin is software, who was the first to think of programmable money?

@BlinddaveC @lisamightydavis @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @dao_veri @VeTest_2017 @QuantumMetals @_CLINTWESTWOOD_ @CryptoNana4LTC @Pac_Man_1967 @RoadtoRoota @clif_high Go here for Reggie, great convo overall.

@lisamightydavis @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @dao_veri @VeriTokenHolder @VeTest_2017 @QuantumMetals @_CLINTWESTWOOD_ @CryptoNana4LTC @Pac_Man_1967 @RoadtoRoota @clif_high Link? I've been busy working on the property, but would like to listen.

Looking forward to this today! @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @dao_veri @VeriTokenHolder @VeTest_2017 @QuantumMetals @BlinddaveC @_CLINTWESTWOOD_ @CryptoNana4LTC @Pac_Man_1967 @RoadtoRoota @clif_high

Go to 1:05;20 and listen. Interesting conversation! x.com/i/spaces/1AGRn…

@BurnTheShorts @lisamightydavis @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @dao_veri @VeTest_2017 @QuantumMetals @BlinddaveC @_CLINTWESTWOOD_ @CryptoNana4LTC @Pac_Man_1967 @RoadtoRoota @clif_high Great host and space as always. Thank you David!

@lisamightydavis @SovereignRiz @ReggieMiddleton @dao_veri @VeriTokenHolder @VeTest_2017 @QuantumMetals @BlinddaveC @_CLINTWESTWOOD_ @CryptoNana4LTC @Pac_Man_1967 @RoadtoRoota @clif_high Can’t wait!!

@SecScottBessent @USTreasury @OIS You oversee the SEC. You are shooing the golden goose! sec.gov/enforcement-li… sec.gov/enforcement-li… US11196566B2.

.@USTreasury's Office of Investment Security is launching the Investment Security Technology Initiative to convene leading experts and strengthen how we safeguard critical investments and emerging technologies. As @OIS Assistant Secretary Chris Pilkerton outlines in @barronsonline, this effort is essential to ensuring the United States remains secure and globally competitive.