Cabral

Tive a honra de escrever um artigo sobre NFTs para a @p2pmebrasil Por favor, interajam e dêem suas sinceras opiniões. Muito obrigado! 🙏🏻

$30 milhões de volume processados.

Estamos preparando el lanzamiento de P2Pme y buscamos personas que quieran innovar y ser parte del futuro del acceso a crypto. P2Pme es un protocolo peer-to-peer que está transformando cómo las personas acceden a dólares digitales manteniendo su privacidad (con ZK KYC) Muy pronto, los usuarios en México podrán convertir USDC a pesos mexicanos en alrededor de 90 segundos usando liquidez proporcionada por merchants. Actualmente estamos buscando participantes tempranos que quieran: • ayudar a construir la liquidez inicial del protocolo • ganar dinero procesando transacciones • formar parte del ecosistema desde el inicio Si te interesa experimentar con nueva infraestructura crypto y quieres ser parte de una innovación que puede cambiar cómo las personas acceden a dólares digitales en México, nos gustaría conocerte. Comenta o envíanos un DM si te interesa participar como merchant desde el inicio.

@0xCokinha in Brazil @perrovolpe and @chesi_crypto in Argentina @KevinNegocios in Venezuela Who we should bring as the biggest supporter for P2Pme joining Mexico?

@alienamarela $P2P

Se você tivesse 100K hoje para investir em cripto, compraria qual token? Não vale Bitcoin 👀

Si quieres comenzar a ser comerciante P2P @p2pmevenezuela es una opción viable. Lo explico todo aquí:

@alienamarela @p2pmebrasil WENNN Hahahah

@cabraldascripto @p2pmebrasil Obrigada, amigo. Feliz que tenha gostado. E o seu próximo: WEN? 👀

I've been thinking about a dynamic that doesn't get discussed enough: the relationship between token distribution and regulatory survival. The basic observation is simple. Regulation needs a target. A CEO to subpoena, a company to sue, a bank account to freeze. This is how enforcement works. But what happens when there's no target? When ownership is distributed across 50,000 people in 120 countries? When there's no headquarters, no corporate entity, no single point of failure? We have clear examples of this playing out. Bitcoin achieved this state organically over a decade. Satoshi disappeared. Mining distributed coins to thousands of participants worldwide. Today there's no Bitcoin Inc to shut down. Regulators understand this. They go after exchanges like Binance and Coinbase, but Bitcoin itself keeps producing blocks every 10 minutes regardless of what any government decides. Ethereum did it more intentionally. The 2014 crowdsale distributed ETH to thousands of early participants across jurisdictions. The Ethereum Foundation @ethereum exists but doesn't control the protocol. When the SEC started asking questions about whether ETH was a security, the answer increasingly became "it doesn't matter because there's no issuer to regulate anymore." Multiple independent teams maintain clients. No single entity can be compelled to change the protocol. Uniswap is the DeFi-era example. @UniswapLabsVC built the protocol, but then distributed UNI tokens broadly and deployed immutable contracts. Today even if Uniswap Labs got shut down tomorrow, the protocol would keep running. The frontend can be geo-blocked, and it has been, but the smart contracts don't care. Anyone can build an interface. The liquidity stays. Tornado Cash showed the limits and the stakes. The protocol was decentralized but the developers weren't distributed enough. They got arrested. The contracts still run, but the case demonstrated that decentralization has to be real and complete, not just aesthetic. Now we're seeing a new wave attempting this transition in real time. @p2pdotme protocol is where we're putting this thesis into practice. We're building decentralized on/off ramps, which is maybe the most regulatory-sensitive category in crypto. Converting between fiat and stablecoins without custodial escrow. We're launching the $P2P token with 50% floating at TGE, no insider unlocks at launch, ownership transferring to token holders through futarchy-based governance. The explicit goal is that the protocol becomes community-owned infrastructure rather than a company product. We chose this structure deliberately because fiat ramps are exactly the kind of thing regulators pay attention to. If we're going to build something that lets anyone in the world convert between local currency and crypto without intermediaries, it needs to be owned by everyone, not controlled by us. The pattern across all these examples is consistent. Start with a team, build something valuable, distribute ownership as widely as possible, step back from control. The team that builds the protocol is not the same as the community that runs it. The transition is the key. Here's where it gets interesting. We're now in a period where innovation is moving maybe 10x to 100x faster than regulatory frameworks can adapt. AI agents executing financial transactions. New forms of coordination that don't map to existing legal categories. Protocols doing things regulators haven't even contemplated yet. The traditional advice is "wait for regulatory clarity." But clarity might take 5 years. Your runway is 18 months. What do you do? One answer, increasingly, is to decentralize fast enough that by the time regulators decide what category you belong to, there's no longer a "you" to regulate. Just a protocol. Just a coordination pattern maintained by thousands of independent actors. This reframes what ICOs actually are. The common view is that an ICO is a fundraising mechanism that happens to use tokens. I'd argue the more important framing is that an ICO is a decentralization mechanism that happens to raise money. The fundraising is almost a side effect. What matters is the ownership distribution. Think about it. A project that raises $10M from 100,000 people has done something fundamentally different from one that raises $100M from 10 VCs. The first has potentially achieved sufficient decentralization. The second has just done a traditional fundraise with token aesthetics. The implications for protocol design are significant. If decentralization is a survival strategy rather than just a philosophical preference, then you should optimize your token launch for distribution breadth rather than capital raised. Airdrops to actual users. Liquidity mining. Grants to contributors. Geographic diversity. Minimal VC concentration. Fast vesting for insiders. Anything that spreads ownership as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Some will object that this is just regulatory arbitrage. Maybe. But I'd distinguish between two cases. Using decentralization to continue doing something clearly illegal is bad and the decentralization doesn't make it legitimate. But using decentralization to preserve useful innovation while regulatory frameworks catch up is different. It's buying time for society to evaluate whether the technology is beneficial. The printing press faced regulatory hostility. So did radio. So did encryption. In each case, the technology survived long enough to prove its value, and regulation eventually adapted. Decentralization can serve the same function for crypto and AI protocols. It's not evasion. It's preservation. The protocols that understand this will structure themselves accordingly. Fast path to community ownership. Minimal insider concentration. Multiple independent teams capable of maintaining the code. Global distribution of token holders. No single entity that can be compelled to shut things down. Bitcoin proved this model works. Ethereum refined it. Uniswap demonstrated it scales to DeFi. The next generation of protocols, in payments and AI agents and whatever comes next, will either learn from these examples or risk becoming regulatory casualties. And when the regulatory dust settles in 5 or 10 years, the decentralized protocols will still be running. The ones that stayed centralized while waiting for clarity may not be. Not financial or legal advice. Just observations about the strategic landscape.

P2P.me ICO en detalles!

Compromisso antecipado:

$P2P MetaDAO sale goes live on March 26 NOTE: NO BID WALL If commitments exceed the $6M ask, the excess will be refunded. Only if total commitments exceed the $80M mark $8M ($20M FDV) be accepted. If total commitments exceed the $150M mark, $10M ( $25M FDV) will be accepted.

thoughts on the new MetaDAO ICO, @P2Pdotme? i think i changed my mind on it come share your opinions in the @ownershipfm telegram: t.me/+ChFS0MFrgT5hY…

@0xNairolf We are doing an ICO in this market. We have users, we have revenue, we are expanding and growing month over month. No point to worry with market conditions. Calm seas don't make great sailors.

Bear market, momento dos governos mexerem as peças do tabuleiro para mais regulação. Proteja-se!

@RooseveltSoare4 Se trabalhar no RJ precisa de um carro por semana 😅

Trabalhando 8h por dia. Valor do Carro: 50.000 2K por SEMANA ! = 4% do valor do carro. 8K por MÊS = 16% do valor do carro. Em 7 meses o carro se paga e você pode talvez comprar um melhor. Quem trabalha 1 mês por SALÁRIO MÍNIMO é louco!

@p2pmebrasil Competição honesta e transparente. Nada a temer = Respeito total

Bear market, protocolos sem dinheiro, governo apertando, regulação engolindo, bancos incomodados. Não é hora do DeFi bater cabeça entre si, é hora de estar mais próximo. Esses ataques que todos nós recebemos diariamente de gente de dentro do cenário são passageiros, vem de pessoas com baixa capacidade de entrega, reputação duvidosa e falta de visão. Isso tudo vai passar, a gente só precisa continuar construindo.

@mdudas What the point of raising pre-seed and not using it to build tech and grow? After pre seed we grew 140x, entered 5 new countries, delivered tons of tech, and made a product with PMF ready to expand globally.

@Thedonkey @P2Pdotme @MetaDAOProject He'd better take a break from web3, probably this big loss is messing up with his brain cells.

The guy telling you that our @p2pdotme ICO in @MetaDAOProject is a bad investment, is the one that lost 5 figures on an airdrop scam. Choose your analysts. DYOR.