Luc Julia, world-renowned expert in artificial intelligence, joins Groupe Renault – Automotive World

Groupe Renault announces the appointment of Luc Julia, a worldwide expert in artificial intelligence and co-creator of the Siri technology, as Groupe Chief Scientific Officer.

The arrival of Luc Julia is great news for the company. His exceptional track record in artificial intelligence, data and object connectivity will be key to accelerating the deployment of our strategy and becoming a tech company that integrates vehicles.Renaulutionis all about talent, expertise and team inventiveness, and we are very pleased to welcome Luc at this moment of transformation for the company,said Luca deMeo.

I am very happy and proud to join Groupe Renaulttoday, the flagship of the French automotive industry. Im also happy to be starting theRenaulutionand to join teams that are building the automotive tech company of tomorrow. Together, drawing on my expertise in human-machine interface and IoT, we will develop new and unique experiences for our customers on and off-board and create value for the Groups brands,said Luc Julia.

Luc Julia will be responsible for supporting the functions and brands in the conception and deployment of the Groups roadmap for innovation and key technologies to meet the challenges of tomorrows mobility. In this capacity, he will act as an expert in fields as diverse as artificial intelligence, man-machine interfaces, connectivity and software. He will oversee the research and development of these technologies and innovations for their integration into the Groups product and service plan. He will also interface with key players and partners in the sector, notably in the framework of the Software Rpublique. In order to accelerate the companys shift towards a value chain more focused on next generation services and products, Luc Julia will also be responsible for instilling the Tech culture within the functions and brands.

SOURCE: Renault Group

Continued here:
Luc Julia, world-renowned expert in artificial intelligence, joins Groupe Renault - Automotive World

Artificial intelligence model predicts which key of the immune system opens the locks of coronavirus – Newswise

Newswise The human immune defense is based on the ability of white blood cells to accurately identify disease-causing pathogens and to initiate a defense reaction against them. The immune defense is able to recall the pathogens it has encountered previously, on which, for example, the effectiveness of vaccines is based. Thus, the immune defense the most accurate patient record system that carries a history of all pathogens an individual has faced. This information however has previously been difficult to obtain from patient samples.

The learning immune system can be roughly divided into two parts, of which B cells are responsible for producing antibodies against pathogens, while T cells are responsible for destroying their targets. The measurement of antibodies by traditional laboratory methods is relatively simple, which is why antibodies already have several uses in healthcare.

"Although it is known that the role of T cells in the defense response against for example viruses and cancer is essential, identifying the targets of T cells has been difficult despite extensive research," says Satu Mustjoki, Professor of Translational Hematology.

AI helps to identify new key-lock pairs

T cells identify their targets in a key and a lock principle, where the key is the T cell receptor on the surface of the T cell and the key is the protein presented on the surface of an infected cell. An individual is estimated to carry more different T cell keys than there are stars in the Milky Way, making the mapping of T cell targets with laboratory techniques cumbersome.

Researchers at Aalto University and the University of Helsinki have therefore studied previously profiled key-lock pairs and were able to create an AI model that can predict targets for previously unmapped T cells.

"The AI model we created is flexible and is applicable to every possible pathogen - as long as we have enough experimentally produced key-lock pairs. For example, we were quickly able to apply our model to coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 when a sufficient number of such pairs were available," explains Emmi Jokinen, M.Sc. and a Ph.D. student at Aalto University.

The results of the study help us to understand how a T cell applies different parts of its key to identify its locks. The researchers studied which T cells recognize common viruses such as influenza-, HI-, and hepatitis B -virus. The researchers also used their tool to analyze the role of T-cells recognizing hepatitis B, which had lost their killing ability after the progression of hepatitis to hepatic cell cancer.

The study has been published in the scientific journalPLOS Computational Biology.

A new life for published data with novel AI models

Tools generated by AI are cost-effective research topics.

"With the help of these tools, we are able to make better use of the already published vast patient cohorts and gain additional understanding of them," points out Harri Lhdesmki, Professor of Computational Biology and Machine Learning at Aalto University.

Using the artificial intelligence tool, the researchers have figured out, among other things, how the intensity of the defense reaction relates to its target in different disease states, which would not have been possible without this study.

"For example, in addition to COVID19 infection, we have investigated the role of the defense system in the development of various autoimmune disorders and explained why some cancer patients benefit from new drugs and some do not", reveals M.D. Jani Huuhtanen, a Ph.D. student at the University of Helsinki, about the upcoming work with the new model.

###

See original here:
Artificial intelligence model predicts which key of the immune system opens the locks of coronavirus - Newswise

Why Computers Will Likely Never Perform Abductive Inferences – Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence

Ive been reviewing philosopher and programmer Erik LarsonsThe Myth of Artificial Intelligence.See my earlier posts,here,here,here,here,andhere.

Larson did aninteresting podcast with the Brookings Institution through its Lawfare Blogshortly after the release of his book. Its well worth a listen, and Larson elucidates in that interview many of the key points in his book. The one place in the interview where I wish he had elaborated further was on the question of abductive inference (aka retroductive inference or inference to the best explanation). For me, the key to understanding why computers cannot, and most likely will never, be able to perform abductive inferences is the problem ofunderdetermination of explanation by data. This may seem like a mouthful, but the idea is straightforward. For context, if you are going to get a computer to achieve anything like understanding in some subject area, it needs a lot of knowledge. That knowledge, in all the cases we know, needs to be painstakingly programmed. This is true even of machine learning situations where the underlying knowledge framework needs to be explicitly programmed (for instance, even Go programs that achieve world class playing status need many rules and heuristics explicitly programmed).

Humans, on the other hand, need none of this. On the basis of very limited or incomplete data, we nonetheless come to the right conclusion about many things (yes, we are fallible, but the miracle is that we are right so often). Noam Chomskys entire claim to fame in linguistics really amounts to exploring this underdetermination problem, which he referred to as the poverty of the stimulus. Humans pick up language despite very varied experiences with other human language speakers. Babies born in abusive and sensory deprived environments pick up language. Babies subject to Mozart from the womb and with rich sensory environments pick up language. Language results from growing up with cultured and articulate parents. Language results from growing up with boorish and inarticulate parents. Yet in all cases, the actual amount of language exposure is minimal compared to language ability that emerges and the knowledge of the world that results. On the basis of the language exposure, many different ways of understanding the world might have developed, and yet we seem to get things right (much of the time). Harvard philosopher Willard Quine, in his classicWord and Object(1960), struggled with this phenomenon, arguing for what he calledthe indeterminacy of translationto make sense of it.

The problem of underdetermination of explanation by data appears not just in language acquisition but in abductive inference as well. Its a deep fact of mathematical logic (i.e.,the Lwenheim-Skolem theorem) that any consistent collection of statements (think data) has infinitely many mathematical models (think explanations). This fact is reflected in ordinary everyday abductive inferences. We are confronted with certain data, such as missing documents from a bank safety deposit box. There are many, many ways this might be explained: a thermodynamic accident in which the documents spontaneously combusted and disappeared, a corrupt bank official who stole the documents, a nefarious relative who got access and stole the documents, etc.

But the et cetera here has no end. Maybe it was space aliens. Maybe you yourself took and hid the documents, and are now suffering amnesia. There are a virtually infinite number of possible explanations. And yet, somehow, we are often able to determine the best explanation, perhaps with the addition of more data/evidence. But even adding more data/evidence doesnt eliminate the problem because however much data/evidence you add, the underdetermination problem remains. You may eliminate some hypotheses (perhaps the hypothesis that the bank official did it, but not other hypotheses). But by adding more data/evidence, youll also invite new hypotheses. And how do you know which hypotheses are even in the right ballpark, i.e., that theyre relevant? Why is the hypothesis that the bank official took the documents more relevant than the hypothesis that the local ice cream vendor took them? What about the local zoo keeper? We have no clue how to program relevance, anda fortioriwe have no clue how to program abductive inference (which depends on assessing relevance). Larson makes this point brilliantly in his book.

You may also wish to read:

Are we spiritual machines? Are we machines at all? Inventor Ray Kurzweil proposed in 1999 that within the next thirty years we will upload ourselves into computers as virtual persons, programs on machines. The themes and misconceptions about computers and artificial intelligence that made headlines in the late 1990s persist to this day.

A critical look at the myth of deep learning Deep learning is as misnamed a computational technique as exists. The phrase deep learning suggests that the machine is doing something profound and beyond the capacity of humans. Thats far from the case.

Artificial intelligence understands by not understanding The secret to writing a program for a sympathetic chatbot is surprisingly simple We needed to encode grammatical patterns so that we could reflect back what the human wrote, whether as a question or statement.

Automated driving and other failures of AI How would autonomous cars manage in an environment where eye contact with other drivers is important? In cossetted and sanitized environments in the U.S., we have no clue of what AI must achieve to truly match what humans can do.

and

Artificial intelligence: Unseating the inevitability narrative. William Dembski: World-class chess, Go, and Jeopardy-playing programs are impressive, but they prove nothing about whether computers can be made to achieve AGI. In The Myth of Artificial Intelligence, Erik Larson shows that neither science nor philosophy back up the idea of an AI superintelligence taking over.

See the original post:
Why Computers Will Likely Never Perform Abductive Inferences - Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market Research Report by Technology, by Application – Global Forecast to 2025 – Cumulative Impact of…

New York, April 19, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market Research Report by Technology, by Application - Global Forecast to 2025 - Cumulative Impact of COVID-19" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p06063085/?utm_source=GNW

Market Statistics:The report provides market sizing and forecast across five major currencies - USD, EUR GBP, JPY, and AUD. This helps organization leaders make better decisions when currency exchange data is readily available.

1. The Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market is expected to grow from USD 683.66 Million in 2020 to USD 1,414.56 Million by the end of 2025.2. The Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market is expected to grow from EUR 599.45 Million in 2020 to EUR 1,240.31 Million by the end of 2025.3. The Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market is expected to grow from GBP 532.91 Million in 2020 to GBP 1,102.64 Million by the end of 2025.4. The Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market is expected to grow from JPY 72,964.67 Million in 2020 to JPY 150,969.39 Million by the end of 2025.5. The Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market is expected to grow from AUD 992.77 Million in 2020 to AUD 2,054.12 Million by the end of 2025.

Market Segmentation & Coverage:This research report categorizes the Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics to forecast the revenues and analyze the trends in each of the following sub-markets:

Based on Technology, the Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market studied across Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neuroradiology, and Radiology.

Based on Application, the Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market studied across Data Mining, Data Storage, Follow-up Plan, Image Acquisition, and Processing to Aided Reporting.

Based on Geography, the Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market studied across Americas, Asia-Pacific, and Europe, Middle East & Africa. The Americas region surveyed across Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and United States. The Asia-Pacific region surveyed across Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. The Europe, Middle East & Africa region surveyed across France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom.

Company Usability Profiles:The report deeply explores the recent significant developments by the leading vendors and innovation profiles in the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market including Aidoc Medical Ltd., Arterys Inc., Butterfly Network Inc., Caption Health, Inc., Enlitic, Inc., Freenome Holdings, Inc., Gauss Surgical Inc., GE Healthcare Inc., General Vision, Inc., Google Inc., Health Fidelity, Inc., IBM Corporation, IBM Corporation, IDx Technologies Inc., Imagen Technologies, Inc., Intel Corporation, Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc., MaxQ AI, Ltd, Medtronic PLC, Microsoft Corporation, Qure.ai, Riverain Technologies, Riverain Technologies, Siemens Healthineers AG, SigTuple Technologies Private Limited, VUNO Inc, and Zebra Medical Vision Ltd.

Cumulative Impact of COVID-19:COVID-19 is an incomparable global public health emergency that has affected almost every industry, so for and, the long-term effects projected to impact the industry growth during the forecast period. Our ongoing research amplifies our research framework to ensure the inclusion of underlaying COVID-19 issues and potential paths forward. The report is delivering insights on COVID-19 considering the changes in consumer behavior and demand, purchasing patterns, re-routing of the supply chain, dynamics of current market forces, and the significant interventions of governments. The updated study provides insights, analysis, estimations, and forecast, considering the COVID-19 impact on the market.

FPNV Positioning Matrix:The FPNV Positioning Matrix evaluates and categorizes the vendors in the Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market on the basis of Business Strategy (Business Growth, Industry Coverage, Financial Viability, and Channel Support) and Product Satisfaction (Value for Money, Ease of Use, Product Features, and Customer Support) that aids businesses in better decision making and understanding the competitive landscape.

Competitive Strategic Window:The Competitive Strategic Window analyses the competitive landscape in terms of markets, applications, and geographies. The Competitive Strategic Window helps the vendor define an alignment or fit between their capabilities and opportunities for future growth prospects. During a forecast period, it defines the optimal or favorable fit for the vendors to adopt successive merger and acquisition strategies, geography expansion, research & development, and new product introduction strategies to execute further business expansion and growth.

The report provides insights on the following pointers:1. Market Penetration: Provides comprehensive information on the market offered by the key players2. Market Development: Provides in-depth information about lucrative emerging markets and analyzes the markets3. Market Diversification: Provides detailed information about new product launches, untapped geographies, recent developments, and investments4. Competitive Assessment & Intelligence: Provides an exhaustive assessment of market shares, strategies, products, and manufacturing capabilities of the leading players5. Product Development & Innovation: Provides intelligent insights on future technologies, R&D activities, and new product developments

The report answers questions such as:1. What is the market size and forecast of the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market?2. What are the inhibiting factors and impact of COVID-19 shaping the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market during the forecast period?3. Which are the products/segments/applications/areas to invest in over the forecast period in the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market?4. What is the competitive strategic window for opportunities in the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market?5. What are the technology trends and regulatory frameworks in the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market?6. What are the modes and strategic moves considered suitable for entering the Global Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market?Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p06063085/?utm_source=GNW

About ReportlinkerReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

Excerpt from:
Artificial Intelligence In Medical Diagnostics Market Research Report by Technology, by Application - Global Forecast to 2025 - Cumulative Impact of...

Vivienne Westwood turns 80: Her most mind-blowing fashion moments – The Independent

Punk icon, environmental activist and designer extraordinaire Vivienne Westwood celebrates her 80th birthday on April 8.

She emerged on the fashion scene in the 1970s, with her androgynous designs, slogan t-shirts, and irreverent attitude towards the establishment.

Since then, Westwood has continued to break boundaries. Shes responsible for some of fashions most famous designs including her take on the corset, the mini-crini a shortened version of the Victorian crinoline dress and Carrie Bradshaws bridal dress in the 2008 Sex And The City movie.

Westwood has also made a name for herself as an activist, staging public protests to raise awareness around causes close to her heart. As she turns 80, these are just some of her most exuberant fashion moments

Vivienne Westwood

When awarded an OBE in 1992, Westwood wore a perfectly tailored skirt suit with a grey matching hat. The outfit might have been demure, but she soon started twirling for photographers only to reveal she wasnt wearing any knickers underneath. She later told the Daily Mail: I met a man who worked with the Queen and he said she was rather amused by it.

Vivienne Westwood

Westwood returned to Buckingham Palace in 2006 to be made a dame, and was once again without underwear but she refrained from doing any twirling this time. She told the Daily Mail: Dont ask. Its the same answer. I dont wear them with dresses.

Vivienne Westwood at the opening of The Vivienne Westwood Exhibition at the V&A Museum

In 2004 the V&A Museum dedicated an exhibition to Westwoods designs, and she attended the opening in suitably provocative style: wearing a red coat dress that clashed with her vibrant orange hair, and two tiny silver devils horns atop her head.

INDY/LIFE NewsletterBe inspired with the latest lifestyle trends every week

INDY/LIFE NewsletterBe inspired with the latest lifestyle trends every week

Vivienne Westwood British Fashion Awards

Westwood has won multiple gongs at the Fashion Awards including designer of the year twice and for the 2009 ceremony, she played around with proportions in a vibrant orange jacket with big shoulders and a sleek chiffon dress underneath with a revealing slit.

In 2018, Westwood collaborated with another giant of British fashion: Burberry. Westwood appeared in the campaign alongside Kate Moss, wearing the iconic Burberry check with her signature platform shoes and wild hair.

Vivienne Westwood

Westwood often brings an element of performance to her protests in December 2018 she protested fracking by dressing as an angel clutching a stone tablet, reframing the 12 Days of Christmas as the 12 days until climate collapse.

Vivienne Westwood at an anti-fracking demonstration

In 2014, she also shaved her signature orange hair to protest climate change.

In 2020 Westwood protested WikiLeaks founder Julian Assanges extradition hearing by wearing a bright yellow suit and climbing inside a cage. She told journalists she chose yellow because canaries could detect poisonous gases in mines. She said: If the canary died they all got out. Julian Assange is in a cage and he needs to get out. Dont extradite to America.

Im wearing yellow because he still hasnt had any sun. A canary is a beautiful thing and wants to fly.

While most of us have been languishing in sweatpants for the past year, Westwood has continued to dress up and her outfits have been documented on Instagram by her husband and design partner Andreas Kronthaler. Whether its a revealing sculptural outfit

or one of her classic corset designs, Westwood shows age is no boundary to having fun with fashion.

Link:

Vivienne Westwood turns 80: Her most mind-blowing fashion moments - The Independent

Batley cartoon row: Media on a mission to provoke Boris Johnson’s culture war – Middle East Eye

It was dangerous, irresponsible and wholly wrong to publish the name of the Batley teacher who showed his class images of the Prophet Muhammad - and criminal to threaten him. Meanwhile, this largely fabricated controversy plays into the hands of the far-right movements and think tanks which have poured so much time, effort and intellectual resource into the argument that there are irreconcilable tensions between the West and Islam.

Let's take a step back. It has long been evident that there is an unspoken alliance between Muslim militants and Muslim bashers. Both assert that Islam and the West cannot coexist.This belief is false, as history repeatedly proves, but every time a row like this blows up it strengthens their case, with the mainstream media brutally airing their toxic talking points.

Batley and its aftermath has much less to do with free speech than Britishnewspaper columnists have unanimously asserted

In this articleI will explain why the Muslim parents who complained were probably (I use the word probably because it cannot be stressed too strongly that we do not know all the facts) entitled to do so.

I will provide evidence that the press coverage has been twisted to portray Batley Muslims as bigots at war with so "British values".But first I will show that Batley and its aftermath has much less to do with free speech than Britishnewspaper columnists have unanimously asserted.

We never have had untrammelled free speech in Britain. Racist speech is illegal. So is hate speech and the incitement of violence. Decent people welcome these interdictions. Meanwhile, libel laws punish the publication of false and defamatory material. Generally speaking, these laws are only available to the very rich who abuse them to protect their reputation.

Nevertheless, it is hard to argue that libel laws should not exist.

Then there are the rules which protect the state. Britain and our allies have committed terrible crimes overseas, especially though not exclusively in Muslim countries. It is difficult, sometimes impossible,to get some of these crimes reported.

Bear in mind the fate which can await those who do - such as Julian Assange, who has been held in Belmarsh prison for two years and may yet die in jail. His crime:free speech.

As Millie Cooke and I reportedherein the British Journalism Review, the British mainstream media with rare exceptions - have downplayedor ignored the Assange case.Yet the United States' insistence that Assange should be extradited for reporting thetruth about US war crimes is the most serious case involvingfree speech so far this century.

Julian Assange's case exposes British hypocrisy on press freedom

As far as I can discover (I will correct the record if I am wrong) not one of the writers and polemicists who have written so urgently for free speech in Batley have spoken up for Assange.

NotMathew Syed. NotMatthew Parris,Fiyaz Mughal,Charles Moore,JoannaRossiter, Kenan Malik. NorNick Timothyin the Telegraph. Nor any other among the large congregation of writers who have piled in against the school and the so-called Batley protesters in apparent defence of free speech.

I invite theseinfluential writers, some of whom I greatly admire, to ask themselves whether they have been guilty of double standards. The attempted extradition ofAssange is backed by massively powerful global interests including the might of the US and British governments, supported by the military and political establishment in both countries.

Don't forget that the majority of US crimes exposed by Assange illegal incarceration in Guantanamo and elsewhere, massacresof unarmed civilians, torture were carried out inMuslim countries.

Bear in mind that had these been carried out by a Muslim state against western citizens, these crimes would have been greeted by banner headlines and Assange would today be hailed as a hero. Remember that it's because we are talking about western assaults on Muslims, and not the other way around, that Julian Assange is a pariah and his revelations are suppressed.

I now turn to the events at Batley. On 22 March, a religious studies teacher showed an image of the Prophet Muhammad during a discussion about blasphemy.The teacher is reported to have shown an image from French magazine Charlie Hebdo, but the actual image has not been released - and this report has not been confirmed by the school.

A better argument should be about the right to offend - and whether and when the right to free speech overrides the offence and emotional damage caused

There were protests outside the school last Thursday and Friday morning. The teacher has been suspended pending an investigation and is now in hiding. Most of these images have been described as "cartoons," yet cartoons are normally thought of as humorous.

There's nothing remotely humorous or funny about the images produced by Charlie Hebdo about the prophet. Like the Jyllands Posten Danish cartoons, they were targeted at Muslims and calculated to mock and insult.Any depiction of the prophet, revered by Muslims, is forbidden within Islam. It does not matter how respectfulthe portrayal. And these portraits were not respectful.

Was it necessary to display these images?The teacher could have discussed the issue without showing them.

We do not know exactly what was shown, or how the teacher framed the debate. But this is crucial to an understanding of what happened. Some commentators have presented the debate as an alternative between showing the image and observing blasphemy laws.

I have no knowledge at all of whether the teacher presented the issue in that way, although that is what most observers have assumed. If so, that is not a real debate in the context of a class discussion. Defence of free speech is legal.Enforcement of blasphemy laws is illegal since they were abolished inEngland and Wales in 2008 and more recently in Scotland. That leaves nothing to debate.

I suggest that a better argument should be about the right to offend -and whether and when the right to free speech overrides the offence and emotional damage caused.

As always, this argument should be placed in context. We are talking of a class populated by 13- and 14-year-old children, many of whom are Muslim. Guidance is available for teachers handling delicate issues like this. In the course of preparation of this article, I have found it helpful to consult an information pack for teachers calledLiving with Controversy.

Others might care to do the same.

Prevent: We need to listen to those harmed by UK counter-extremism policy

There is one other consideration which the well-paid and comfortable leader writers at the Telegraph and The Times might not have taken into account. Free speech does not exist for 13-year-old Muslim children in Batley.One phrase out of line in a discussion as sensitive as the Charlie Hebdo cartoons and a teacher might feel he had no choice but to report them under Prevent guidelines.

This means that if the teacher did present the issue as a "debate"between the law and an illegal act, rather than what is lawful and the benefits of self-restraint, he was putting pupils at risk.Once again there is no evidence that he did this, but that is what many of the media commentators rushing to his defence appear to assume.

Every article in the mainstream press - bar none - has made essentially the same argument. This case is about free speech versus bigotry.

One thing worries me. We are talking about some of the poorest and least influential people in this country.British commentators pay a zero price for painting these people as bigots who pose an existential threat to our cherished western freedoms.

Episodes like this sometimes make me wonder whether there are in fact two separate categories of free speech. One for us, and one for Muslims

Episodes like this sometimes make me wonder whether there are in fact two separate categories of free speech. One for the rich and one for the poor. One for the powerful and one for the weak. One for us, and one for Muslims. This makes it significant that the only article I have found challenging the consensus was made outside the mainstream media in aself-published blog.

I had not come across the author, Jon Yates, before. He has a book about how to heal fractured societies being published this summer. Yates pointed out that Britain cheerfully acceptsall kinds of interdictions on free speech, and nobody minds. He suggested we should all attempt a mental experiment and imagined that the teacher:

"Had brought in an article from the 1950s America about race relations. He had read it aloud without noticing that in the third and fifth paragraph was the n-word. He had not stopped but had read it out. He had then spent some time loudly discussing exactly how to pronounce the word... Or maybe he decided to act out Othello. To catch everyone's attention, he arrived in class in blackface."

He says that would have been deemed unacceptable. The headmaster would have apologised. The teacher would have been suspended while an investigation was carried out.And that is exactly what happened atBatley. The headmaster acted sensibly. He was not to quote Brendan O'Neill in the Spectator "buckling to religious extremists, cravenly begging for forgiveness for something that ought to be perfectly acceptable in an institute of learning".

Meanwhile, one man more than any other figure has come to embody the "angry Muslims"reportedlyprotesting outside Batley Grammar School. Attentive newspaper readerswill be familiar with his turban, his full silver beard and mask. Photographs present him as the leader of the protests.

I tracked down him down.MuftiMohammed Amin Pandor is a former civil servant. He told me that far from protesting, hewas outside the school at the request of the police, who asked him to calm things down.

I checked. Here isvideo footage of him doing just that,stressing that "due process"should be observed.

Look carefully at the press photographs of Mohammed Pandor and you will see that in some of them the protesters are actually outnumbered by the press.Which was the real baying mob outside the school?

Was it the "angry Muslims"portrayed in British media reports? Or was it the British media on a mission to provoke Boris Johnson's latest culture war?

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

View post:

Batley cartoon row: Media on a mission to provoke Boris Johnson's culture war - Middle East Eye

GameStop and Bitcoin Renewed a Push to Digitize the Stock Market – The Wall Street Journal

Imagine a world where you could buy stocks, bonds, derivatives, cryptocurrencies or even pieces of art, all on one exchange, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, from anywhere in the world.

On this exchange, trades occur directly between two investors instead of through a complex latticework of brokers, clearinghouses and other middlemen and gatekeepers. They settle, or close, almost instantly, instead of taking up to two days. The system is cheaper, more transparent and ostensibly more open. It is also potentially more volatile and risky for investors; profits can turn into losses in the wink of an eye at any time of the day or night.

Entrepreneurs have for years dreamed of using blockchain technology, the concepts and software underpinning bitcoin, to enable digital trading of virtually any asset. Today the idea seems less far-fetched than ever.

When trading of videogame retailer GameStop Corp. exploded earlier this year, it illustrated just how fragile todays markets can be. It also showed that a new generation of stock traders operates much like crypto traders: Flash mobs of retail traders gathering on social media and targeting an asset for a mass-buy has been a hallmark of cryptocurrency trading for years.

The current capital markets arent built for that kind of trading, but a number of pilot programs and other experiments are investigating how to create digitized markets that can keep up with changing times. Were seeing a tectonic shift start to happen, says Jeffrey Schumacher, the founder of New Asset Exchange, a Manhattan Beach, Calif.-based startup that aims to help companies create and sell digital securities.

See the original post here:
GameStop and Bitcoin Renewed a Push to Digitize the Stock Market - The Wall Street Journal

At $60,000, Is Bitcoin Too Expensive? – Motley Fool

Bitcoin (CRYPTO:BTC) has risen dramatically to a price tag of nearly $60,000 as of early April. Is it still a good time to add the leading cryptocurrency to your portfolio? In thisFool Live video clip,recorded on March 18, senior analyst John Rotonti and Motley Fool Deutschland lead analyst Bernd Schmid discuss Bitcoin's price tag and how investors should think about it.

John Rotonti: So Bitcoin's price has skyrocketed recently. I think it's somewhere around $60,000 U.S. per coin. Is it too late for investors to get in?

Bernd Schmid: I don't think so. I personally don't buy it anymore. It always depends when you get in. I look at it from a portfolio perspective. But I think how I look at it, what could happen to Bitcoin with short term or in the longer term, the one thing I mentioned before, is the $1 trillion market cap compared to what Bitcoin might be in the future. I think a very likely use case is Bitcoin could be the digital gold. Then it could still 7X from today until whenever this might happen, or it could, like I mentioned, if it replaces more than just gold, the value could theoretically be even higher. I think it's the best way to get at least the gauge of could this thing be worth. It's certainly not too late, but, and this is what I want to mention, based on historical cycles, there's about a four-year cycle, which Bitcoin has, and Bitcoin has actually dropped every four years by about 80-90%.

Rotonti: Where are we in that cycle? Do you know where we are in that cycle? Year two, year three?

Schmid: Yes. Actually, the pool part of the cycle is quite short. I think it's about a year, don't fix like I'm not 100% sure. But we are like in the middle of same, in the beginning to middle. Actually, I have a chart what I did and actually PlanB, but I mentioned before he does as well. I did it myself. I chartered the last two cycles and the average of the last two cycles. Right now and the last two cycles you have from the start of the cycle about a 30X to 50X in terms of price movement. So from whatever, from $100 to $5,000 or last time, I think the top was about $20,000. This cycle started with around between five and $10,000. So if you count the 20x, you would be somewhere between $100,000 $200,000, that's where this can go into the cycle. Even when we talked about this cycle, I personally, if you think the top will we reached in the same timeframe like last two cycles, shifted, it will be reached about mid-to-end or begin mid-end. Two to three times increase of Bitcoin until the top is being reached in a couple of months. But then be aware, you never know what's going to go. You don't know if the top is, maybe even sooner, and there might likely, I think there will be a drop by 80% at some point of time I think. I still believe.

Rotonti: That's fascinating Bernd and I love how you scale it by comparing it to real gold. Because if this is the digital gold and it's currently got a $1 trillion market cap. I think you said so far we've mined about $7 to $10 trillion worth of gold, right? so if there's a potential 7-10x run from here, potentially.

Schmid: You know, if you look at it from a value investor's perspective, you actually know that's tough, actually. It never only goes to the value of actually has it always overshoot and undershoot. So it's quite likely that you go even beyond that. You just never know when all these things are going to happen. But one thing is certain, that are relatively certain is that we will have very high volatility. You might be down 50% in a short amount of time. You have to start like these kind of things and consider it if you invest into it.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the official recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. Were motley! Questioning an investing thesis -- even one of our own -- helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

See more here:
At $60,000, Is Bitcoin Too Expensive? - Motley Fool

‘We’ve reached a tipping point’ on bitcoin adoption, Fidelity’s Tom Jessop says – MarketWatch

Tom Jessop, head of Fidelity Digital Assets at Fidelity Investments, says that the maturation and adoption of digital assets as a class of investments will continue at a rapid pace in coming years, signaling that crypto may have turned a corner in traditional finance circles.

I think we continue to see adoption at an accelerated pace for a host of reasons, he said Wednesday afternoon during an interview at MarketWatch and BarronsInvesting in Crypto virtual event series.

Check out: U.S. is behind the curve on crypto regulations, says SEC Commissioner Peirce

Jessop said that a backdrop of ultralow interest rates and an environment that has been stimulated by easy-money policies has helped to drive momentum into bitcoin BTCUSD, +0.62% and other assets, which are increasingly being seen as alternatives to assets that are considered richly priced by some measure and bonds that are offering meager yields.

The S&P 500 index SPX, +0.42% booked its 18th record closing high of 2021 on Wednesday and the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.17% wasnt far from its all-time high as the 10-year Treasury TMUBMUSD10Y, 1.645% yielded around 1.66%.

Read: China may be using bitcoin as financial weapon against U.S., says Peter Thiel

Were not going to get out of this stimulated environment anytime soon, Jessop said. I think weve reached a tipping point.

I think youve had the accumulated experience of now roughly 12 years of the bitcoin blockchain being operative since the genesis block in early 2009. And the pandemic, quite frankly, was a catalyst for institutional adoption, and specifically bitcoin and the narrative, or use-case, around digital gold, Jessop said.

Particularly, in an environment where weve seen unprecedented monetary and fiscal stimulus from central banks and governments in response to the pandemic, he said.

Fidelity has been at the vanguard of integrating digital assets into traditional investment portfolios. The asset manager was one of the first major institutions to explore bitcoin, starting in 2015.

The company created the digital asset unit, which Jessop heads, in 2019.

Bitcoin was trading at $56,500 on Wednesday, up 95% so far this year.

Want to understand the future of cryptos and NFTs? Register for MarketWatchs free live event:https://events.marketwatch.com/crypto/home

Read more:
'We've reached a tipping point' on bitcoin adoption, Fidelity's Tom Jessop says - MarketWatch

This Financial Advisor Thinks Bitcoin Could Be Headed for Mass Adoption – Motley Fool

Tyrone Ross is the CEO of Onramp Invest, and several publications have named him one of the top financial advisors in the United States. He's also a big believer in Bitcoin's (CRYPTO:BTC) potential to transform the financial system as we know it. In thisFool Live interview,recorded on March 18, Fool.com contributor Matt Frankel, CFP, asks Tyrone about Bitcoin's potential as a payment mechanism, why Bitcoin is such a volatile asset right now, when Bitcoin might reach mass adoption, and much more.

Matt Frankel: For those who don't know, Tyrone is CEO of Onramp Invest. He was named in InvestmentNews' top 40 advisors under 40, which is a pretty big accomplishment. WealthManagement.com called him one of the top 10 advisors set to change the industry in 2019. That's a pretty impressive resume I just read. I gave the short version. Can you briefly explain what it is that you do? What is Onramp Invest? What do you do?

Tyrone Ross: I'm the CEO of Onramp Invest, which is a platform that is going to allow financial advisors to interact with Bitcoin for their clients the same way they would Appleright now. We're going to get into the portfolio management software and the financial planning software to allow them to model, plan, build, and give them access to qualified custodians.

Frankel: OK. I know a lot of the work you do, it's involving cryptocurrency as a mechanism for the unbanked and underbanked segment of the population. Do you view Bitcoin as a replacement for U.S. dollar, like a payment bank or a replacement for bank accounts, or a way to store wealth, or all of the above?

Ross: First, I've got to say that I'm no longer saying "unbanked" and "underbanked." That has become a trope. I say underserved. Yes, I think Bitcoin and other crypto networks are a boon to the underserved of what is allowing for access in those that have been shut out of the traditional financial system due to financial redlining, so yes.

To your second point, Bitcoin is all of those things. It's currency, it's money, it's all savings, technology, depending on where you are in the world and the lens with which you look at it. But for me, growing up into a home that was underserved and having used the alternative financial system -- my parents, to this day, still use money orders. I came to Bitcoin because a friend sent it to me and I got it instantly, and I'm like, whoa, wait a minute. I don't have to wait three to six days for my money to settle? That's how I came to where I think the power of the Bitcoin, big "B," blockchain, is, as opposed to bitcoin, little "b," the coin, which is the price everyone is so over-concerned about.

Frankel: It definitely makes sense when you say "underserved," because it's not just people who don't have access to traditional banking services. It's people that, the traditional banking system doesn't necessarily serve them well.

Ross: Exactly.

Frankel: What you just said, three to six days for the check to clear.

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: That's not even to mention international money transfers, how long, and cost how much money.

Ross: Absolutely -- $15 to receive a wire, to receive it; $30 to spend it. It's egregious.

Frankel: Bitcoin definitely cuts back on that. First of all, just to clarify, when you say cryptocurrency, do you focus on Bitcoin, or are there others? Because I just looked before we recorded this -- there are over 4,600 cryptocurrencies that exist. I know that some of them are really small. Let's call them very niche tokens. But do you think any other than Bitcoin, or is that what we're talking about here?

Ross: I think there are more. I think there's maybe 10, and there are probably two that I think are worth people paying most attention to right now, which is the Bitcoin blockchain and the Ethereum (CRYPTO:ETH) blockchain. Ether and Bitcoin. But there are some other projects out there that are notable, but the fact that there's 4,000 of them is a joke.

But for the purposes of this conversation, yeah, I think Bitcoin is the one with the biggest brand. It's the most Lindy. It's been around the longest. It's all in the news. That's the one that everyone talks and hears about. But I think what people should understand is, no matter how you feel about Bitcoin, I think that's where you should start. If you're like, I don't know, and you want to go to something else, that's fine. But you should at least start there because again, we always go back to the origin. You want to trace your roots back to the beginning. If you are into crypto networks whatsoever, then you've got to start at Bitcoin. Again, whether it's for you or not, that's a personal decision, but it's a good place to start for people to just get a feel for blockchains and things like that.

Frankel: Getting back to your financial advisory activities, I also saw in addition to all the recommendations you were given, that I already mentioned, you were named one of Investopedia's 100 top financial advisors. I was looking at that list before we were talking. There are some pretty good companies on there. I saw Josh Brown, who I see on CNBC every day.

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: There was a Kiplinger's columnist that was in the top. You're in pretty good company there.

Ross: Yeah. I snuck on there.

Frankel: Well, I don't want to say you snuck on there, but there are over 100,000 financial advisors in the U.S.

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: Technically, I'm a financial advisor. I'm a CFP. And I have a couple of people I advise. That puts you in the 0.1%, if I'm doing my math correctly there.

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: How did you sneak on the list, as you put it?

Ross: For me, one of the things that I think is important is, as an advisor, you can do a lot of different things. You could work with veterinarians; you can work with horse jockeys; you can work with whoever you want, and you just got to find your lane. I'm a wirehouse baby. I came up through the wirehouse because I was in Merrill and I left Merrill, went independent, and when I went independent, I'm like, you know what, I'm going to find my voice. I'm going to leverage social media to talk about the things that I care about, which is being a voice for the voiceless and the underserved in this country. Then I had this passion for early-stage startups and crypto, so they all came together and it gave me my own unique lens and voice.

I think it also helped that, again, I'm an African American male. There's not too many of us. When you have a voice and you can speak to something and add value, it's very easy to stand out. I just leaned on what I cared about and shed the skin of I need to be this to fit in to get on these lists. And it's funny, when you try to get on the list, you don't; when you don't try, you get on the list. Take that for what it's worth.

Frankel: No, it makes sense. You said crypto is one of your big passions. What role can and should cryptocurrency play in a well-rounded investment portfolio? Even if I'm trying to use it for banking purposes at the moment, what role would it play?

Ross: I love how you asked it that way -- "can and should." What it can do, the asymmetric properties of it, and sharp ratios and diversified, all of those beautiful things that advisors care about -- it does have a place in the portfolio for that. The key is trying to find out, one, for a client, whether they should own it at all. If it helps them get closer to their goals. I'm not here to say that I think it does, but that's for an advisor to determine based on the risk profile of the clients.

Also, speaking of risks, how much risk can the client take? If a client comes in and says, "Yeah, tell me about this Dogecointhing or Bitcoin." You're like, "Wait, Mr. and Mrs. Client, your risk profile is a 2. Dogecoin is a 22. Why are you asking?" Re-profile the client, and look at the sweet spot is somewhere between 2.5% to 5% of the portfolio. When you look at the improvement, and risk-adjusted returns, and things like that, it's hard to ignore it. It can be a great add to a portfolio.

Should it is a totally different conversation. Where someone is in age; what their goals are. If I'm looking to retire, am I adding Bitcoin that has 80% drawdowns to my portfolio? Probably not. If I'm 35 and I've come into my own and I have ample liquidity, and I see this as a store of value at some point, or digital gold, or whatever, a venture type bet, sure. I think it all depends on if it should versus what it can do.

Frankel: OK. I know you saw this news, because you tweeted about it today. Morgan Stanley just announced that it's launching funds to give clients access to Bitcoin. I assume you applaud this move, first of all.

Ross: Well, I don't know if I applaud it so much as it's shocking to me that the broker/dealers are moving faster than the RIAs. That's shocking. I do think it's good news because again, if you go back a couple of years, it was Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan, and Goldman Sachs, and this was stupid and it was tulips or whatever. It's just validation in that sense. What I don't like is Bitcoin is supposed to be for everybody, but yet they're saying you got to be accredited and you got to have $2 million of assets at the firm or whatever.

But again, I get it, because most of the folks at Morgan Stanley are high net worth or whatever and folks that want to get at the cash that they can. This is just part of the financialization of Bitcoin, and I get it. I applaud it in the sense it is great for the space, because one of the things before you get mass adoption, you get mass acceptance. We need to get through mass acceptance. Then we'll get mass adoption, and I think when your Morgans of the world, and your BNY Mellons, and all of these names that people know, start to get involved, then you go, all right, we're reaching the mass acceptance stage.

Frankel: When do you think we're going to see mass adoption of Bitcoin as a payment mechanism? I know just in the past year or so, I know PayPal (NASDAQ:PYPL) announced that they're planning to roll out Bitcoin acceptance on all of their merchants. Do you see this as a way in the future thing? Do you see it as a few years? In other words, how long do you think the speculative period of Bitcoin lasts?

Ross: When crypto has its iPhone moment, and I think that's going to take a lot more of design folks, UX/UI, that are used to designing this beautiful experience for people, where it's just operating in the background and you don't know. When I'm using Bitcoin, and blockchain, and all these things and I don't even know, and it's just this beautiful experience. Then you get the Steve Jobs of crypto, who says, I'm going to make you want something that you didn't even know you needed, and you're like, "Man, I really need an iPhone." Then we're going to make sure every time we update it, you're going to go out and get it. But it's a beautiful experience.

I think once we get beautiful design and experience into crypto, it's going to cross over, because then you get away from public key, private key, losing this. What about this? How do I store it? Where do I put it? Once all that's gone and it's just in my phone, my Apple Wallet or whatever. You saw the news of Visa (NYSE:V) yesterday again, saying that with a credit card and everything else, making Visa simply to access a Bitcoin, easy to use on your phone, and be able to convert it to dollars. When we get there, it's game on.

And regulation plays a part in that too, because if you use a Bitcoin to buy things, every one of those transactions are taxable. We have to make sure that we get away from that as well. There's a long way to go here.

Frankel: One of the things I often say about new technology is if it's not easy, people aren't going to do it, no matter how good it is.

Ross: One hundred percent.

Frankel: In other words, you're saying when Bitcoin becomes as easier or easier to use than U.S. dollar, that's going to be the iPhone moment, I guess you would say.

Ross: One hundred percent, because that's what it is. It's cash. The ease of which I could just walk up to you and hand you $20 and walk away. That's not taxable. I can do the same thing with Bitcoin right now. But when everyone does that and it's just a matter of fact -- "I just sent you Bitcoin" -- you get it and there's nothing to it, then we'll be there. But we're not there yet.

Frankel: OK. When I talk to people about Bitcoin, one of the things they're most worried about, and it's something that Bitcoin bulls are really excited about, it's the volatility. Right now, as we're speaking, Bitcoin is worth nearly 10 times what it was a year ago.

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: Being fair, that's not stable as a payment mechanism.

Ross: No.

Frankel: What do you say to investors, even with a high risk tolerance, who are worried about the volatility of Bitcoin?

Ross: I want to address what you said. The Bitcoin blockchain is a beautiful payment mechanism. The price isn't. So you've got to separate those two. I agree with you. It shouldn't be a payment mechanism. Now, there's something called Lightning that's being built, but you shouldn't be buying things with your Bitcoin anyway for exactly what I said. Every time you buy a coffee, that would be a taxable event, and there's other things to that. What I think is important here with the volatility is, yes, those of us that are crypto-hippies look at the volatility and say, "Oh, it's great," because we can stomach it and we know better. The average person goes, "It's down 80%." A lot of people can't stomach a 10% drop, 5% drop, 1% drop. This thing drops 80%? A lot of people don't want to take that ride on the roller coaster.

But the volatility, when you learn about Bitcoin, is a feature, not a bug, and it's one of those things where, when you look at it, it also is proof of how early we are still. It will smooth out.

Last month, the 30-day volatility had jumped higher than it had been, I think, for the previous seven years. Going back to 2013, the 30-day volatility jumped up 160-plus percent. My company did some research on that. It got picked up. The volatility has picked up. The correlation to risk assets. A year ago, when things went nuts, it went down with it, because the first thing you do is you sell risky assets. So we're still there.

But every day it gets stronger and grows, and it stays around and you get more institutional adoption, and there's the ability for large investors to move in size with best execution and best price discovery. Those things are important, and we're getting there. But for the time being, yeah, the volatility for those of us that can stomach it and know go, "Yes, It's on sale," but not everybody can do that. And that will change.

Frankel: The way you look at it is the more important thing would be Bitcoin moving from say, 10% adoption to 20% adoption than moving from $20,000 to $50,000?

Ross: Exactly. That's the key, and there's that volatility and adoption, too. Because think about it. Go back to 2017. It's all retail, and now all the institutions are like, "Look at these idiots." Now you've got the institutions coming in, and now all the retail that was in and stayed in, they're like, "Look at these idiots." The volatility of who comes in; the volatility of price; the volatility of price discovery.

I did a webinar with Digital Assets Research and FTSE Russell, and at any point that you can check the price of Bitcoin across some exchanges, it could be off by 2%. That's crazy. There's volatility in a lot of different things which are new, and the best example is this: I'm not a parent, but I have three nephews. You ever watch a child learn to walk? That is very volatile. "Oh, they're going to hit their head. Oh, they fell again." And you know what they do? They get up and they keep trying, and they fall.

But it's a very volatile thing. It's new. Anything new, or any 12-year-old -- Bitcoin is 12 -- 12-year-olds are volatile. I say this is in jest comparing a technology to a human being, but anything that's new is going to be volatile. It just is. And then it has to find its way, and I think that's what's happening in this space.

Frankel: It's fair to say as adoption keeps going, it will eventually stabilize. That could be 20 years from now, but it should eventually find some kind of equilibrium.

Ross: Yeah, it will. I think folks like myself, a long-dated call option on a store value, I think it will get there. I don't think it's there now, but you're betting that it'll become that in the future.

Frankel: That's right. I mean, it's important to note that U.S. dollars aren't completely stable. They fluctuate against other currencies all the time. So that's never going to go away entirely.

Let me pivot to regulation just for a second, if I may, because you mentioned that earlier. Regulation and taxes are obviously two different things, but they're two big concerns in the Bitcoin community. On the tax issue first, do you think the IRS is eventually going to recognize Bitcoin as a currency, meaning that every time you buy a soda with Bitcoin it's not going to be a taxable event?

Ross: Oh, man. That would be nice. But I don't know if we ever get there. Right now they look at it as property. I think it will remain that way for a while, but we'll see. Sunayna Tuteja, who was just at TD Ameritrade, who is now on the Federal Reserve, she's very smart, and capable, and we're all excited that she's there. Maybe she gets them closer to recognizing that it should be recognized as a currency. I don't know. We'll see, I think that's a ways off. But it'd be nice if it happened. I do think we'll get there at some point, but I think it's a ways off.

Frankel: Should regulation be embraced by the cryptocurrency community or feared? Because I mean, this headline I saw in India the other day when they were proposing to outlaw cryptocurrency, obviously, that should be feared. But I mean, just normal oversight of Bitcoin, should that be embraced as mainstreaming?

Ross: See, the decipher punks and the original libertarians, they're like, "No." But I think if you want mass adoption, you need it to be mass-accepted by regulatory authorities. The financialization of it and putting these boxes in place if you really want it there. Ben Hunt was talking about this on Twitter. He was like, "Look, guys. That's where it's at. You've got to embrace this. We're here. The financialization of it is here."

The beautiful thing about Bitcoin and being decentralized and self-sovereign, there's only so much regulation you can put around it. It's open-source. It's borderless. It's open, decentralized, all of these different things that allow those properties to remain inherent to it, which is why it's so elegant and beautiful. But I think they should embrace it. I think it's good for it, but to an extent. You don't want overregulation, and I think that's what most folks are worried about, the overregulation.

But I think some regulation is good, like that clarity, property, well, now it's currency. For the SEC and the CFTC to get together, for financial advisors to give them clarity on it's a security, it's not a security; you can say this, you can't say that. There's a lot of the regulatory compliance environment that needs to be clarified, but I think we'll get there eventually.

Frankel: What is the best way you advise your clients to actually get involved in Bitcoin? Is it to buy directly through an exchange? Is it to use a broker that offers Bitcoin? Is it to use one of those, like, the Bitcoin Trust that trades on the exchange? I saw a look when I said that one.

Ross: Buddy, I literally just got done doing a webinar with an advisor. It was an Investopedia webinar, actually, on this. And that came up about what advisors should be. If I'm an advisor, I'm doing this, and this is me personally, as an advisor I don't really actively practice. But I would not, personally right now, actively put my clients in anything. Me, personally, I can't speak for every advisor. There's nothing out there that I would go "All right, I would put my clients into that." If there was a way for me to get direct exposure for my clients at a qualified custodian which exists right now, I would do that. That's available, and again, there's some piping that needs to happen, which is why I have a job. That's what Onramp is trying to do.

Now, take the advisor out of it, and I'm just an individual. There's a myriad of wonderful places you can go. I'm a big fan of Cash App. Swan Bitcoin is another good one. I mean, there's Coinbase; there's Robinhood; there's a million choices for people. Again, I love Cash App with what they're doing for the underserved and how they are giving people access. But as an advisor, I would be very careful to vet things, especially based on the SEC risk alert that came out, which is custody, policies and procedures, valuation methodologies, being able to disclose fees, all of the price of these vehicles. If you could do all that due diligence, have at it.

But again, if I'm RIA or even with BD, they can't do it anyway, even with Morgan Stanley. Maybe you put them in this fund and you're free and clear. But I would make sure that there's qualified custody -- that there's KYC, AML, all that other stuff that I can track an archive and everything else. But me personally, I'm not using anything that's out there.

Frankel: There are really no good exchange trading platforms yet for Bitcoin. They should be coming soon.

Ross: Yeah, they're coming, and there are some exchange-traded funds now that are out there. Again, it's not my job to say whether they're good or bad, but I can give my personal opinion. When I did have clients that were doing this, they already owned it before they came to me, but I've never made a suggestion like, "Hey, you should go buy," because I knew what was out there. What advisors should and shouldn't do, and you shouldn't be making recommendations on stuff, like, if you tell a client, "All right, we're going to buy Apple at Fidelity," that's a very safe thing to say, and you tell a client, "Oh, we're going to buy Dogecoin and Binance." Probably shouldn't be doing that. Totally different conversation.

Frankel: Sure. I mean, I'm glad you mentioned that. One of the biggest hang-ups that a lot of people have is, "Oh, my Bitcoin is going to get hacked or stolen," or something to that effect. That was a big problem in the early days. Not so much a problem anymore. I mean, most of the revenue exchanges, they personally became insurance, the U.S.-based exchange. A lot of their Bitcoins are in cold storage, which means not stored on the internet, so you can't track. Do you see any big security risk with buying Bitcoin, as long as people buy it from a reputable place? I know you said Cash App is one of your favorites.

Ross: There's always a security risk, and the main risk is the person. I've gotten five -- count them, five -- in the last couple of days, folks that have lost their crypto because they didn't store passwords properly, because they didn't follow proper protocol of storing their own keys or their seed phrase, all these other things. But the majority of people who don't want to handle all that would go to a centralized authority like a Cash App or a Coinbase. You are there, but again, there's the risk of they can cut you off from it or something happens, so there's all types of risks. It's just which risk you want to take. I think if you want to take that self-custody security risk away, yeah, you go to one of those platforms and they can help you with that.

Frankel: I guess, in that way, the slowness of the traditional banking system is an asset. Because if someone hacks into my bank account and tries to wire some money, there's usually a period I can catch it. That's not necessarily the case with Bitcoin.

Ross: You hit "send" on that, and then it's gone, right? Then you're like, "Oh, my God, please send me the confirm. It went through."

Frankel: The exchanges themselves are safe, but make sure you save all your passwords and keys on that.

Ross: Again, Coinbase, Gemini. Gemini has a very robust security system. A lot of these exchanges know, and they do have insurance as well. Yeah, I think you are in safer hands there using a centralized custodian than doing it yourself.

Frankel: Just to clarify real quick, a lot of these that you mentioned -- Coinbase, Gemini, they cater to people who want to buy and hold Bitcoin as well as traders. They have pretty sophisticated trading platforms.

Ross: Yeah, they do. If you want to buy and hold or you want to trade your life away.

Frankel: I assume you're a buy-and-hold type of guy.

Ross: Buy and hold. I do not trade. I buy it, buy it, buy it, hold it, and I don't look at the price. Don't care about the price. I've never met a rich trader popping bottles in the club.

Frankel: I would definitely agree with that one. Buy and hold is definitely the way to go. I assume you would advise clients the same. Buy the coin; hold it; don't trade.

Ross: Sure. Again, depends on the client. I mean, I had clients that would trade in their brains out, but that's what they wanted to do with their own money. Again, it was held away from me. I couldn't see it, couldn't do anything with it, but they had their Bitcoin, which is away and safe and then they wanted to trade. All right. It's just like an advisor now. You don't think your clients have a little play account where they're trading GameStop? Of course they do. They just got their safe assets with you, and I think any advisor would be OK with that. But the advisor is like, "Don't bring that to me. Keep it over there." And you do it right in. I'm not going to give you any advice on that. That's on you.

Frankel: Since we are an all-around investment website, you mentioned, I think, the ideal Bitcoin -- you said the sweet spot is 2% to 2.5%, I think, if I'm quoting you correctly?

Ross: Yeah, somewhere between 2.5% to 5%. That's the sweet spot when you add it to a portfolio.

Frankel: So depending on risk tolerance, as you said?

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: What are the other 95%, then? Your opinion as the advisor.

Ross: To 5%; that's the sweet spot there when you add it to a portfolio.

Frankel: So depending on risk tolerances, as you said?

Ross: Yeah.

Frankel: What are the other 95%, then? Your opinion as the advisor.

Ross: Again, that has a lot to do with the client's age and goal, things like that. I think right now, how do you not look at emerging markets? I think value has suffered, but growth stocks have done well. I'm still a fan of holding individual stocks. I think there's value in that, but again, it's tough.

But as far as a crypto portfolio, I think there's Bitcoin, and you can possibly look at adding in some Ethereum, if that makes some sense to you. Things are going on in Ethereum in blockchain and Ether, the actual token. The Ethereum blockchain and what's going on with DeFi allows you to get some yields, so that might make some sense if you have some stable coins there, USDC or whatever. Ether, the actual token, is a good hold as well for some people. But again, it's all a personal type of thing. But I think having a sleeve of Bitcoin and then depending on your goals, a nice mix of overseas -- everyone should own SPY; don't know why they don't. But it's a personal situation with goals and risks and age and everything else.

Frankel: We are just about out of time, but I wanted to give you the last word. If people want to find out more about what you're doing and give a website at whatever you would like to share or anything like that?

Ross: If you want to find out more about what I'm doing, please go to nokidhungry.org and help feed a hungry child. There is no reason why there is child poverty in this country, and I will not shut up and stop until every child is fed and they have the best chance at achieving financial success and freedom in the United Great States of America.

Frankel: You heard it. Thank you so much for joining us, Tyrone. That was a great interview.

Ross: Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the official recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. Were motley! Questioning an investing thesis -- even one of our own -- helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

Read this article:
This Financial Advisor Thinks Bitcoin Could Be Headed for Mass Adoption - Motley Fool