LG has demonstrated what it calls the first TV set to offer 5.1 audio without any speakers. It comes with a vibrating screen and an eyewatering price tag.

The idea of the screen itself producing the sound is not new. Sony already offers it in one model, while LG has used the technology on both a smartphone and a bendable 48-inch panel.

The LG version uses “Cinematic Sound OLED” which involves a thin magnetic film behind the screen. Rapidly switching the magnets on and off causes the screen to vibrate and emit sound.

The difference with the new set is that it doesn’t just do stereo, but rather uses a 5.1 channel system. LG notably uses the term “cinematic level of immersion” rather than the traditional 5.1 phrase “surround sound” though how well it can create that immersive effect when all the sound originates from one direction remains to be seen.

The key to getting the distinct “channels” of sound is likely the screen size: 97 inches. Most viewing calculators don’t cover screens that big, but you’d probably want about 15 feet between you and the screen to get the most out of it. It’s also scheduled to cost around $25,000.

The rich folk with big living rooms will no doubt keep the rest of us up to date on how well the technology works day to day. The problem may be that even if it does live up to the hype, the 5.1 channel element may not work as well when scaled down to smaller screen.

A securities lawsuit could have big ramifications for cryptocurrency in the United States.

The case involves a man who allegedly worked at a crypto exchange and bought tokens based on his insider knowledge that they would be listed at the exchange and thus increase in value.

Although he faces criminal charges from the Department of Justice, Wired explains it’s a civil case from the Securities and Exchange Commission that could be more significant. That’s because they aren’t just accusing the man of insider trading but also securities fraud.

The key isn’t so much whether the man did what he’s accused of, but rather whether the court agrees with the SEC’s argument that the cryptocurrencies count as securities. That’s a longstanding question as the classification dates back to 1933 and was debatably vague even before technology evolved.

If cryptocurrencies are indeed securities (specifically “investment contracts”), then theoretically anyone issuing them would need to register with the SEC and follow its disclosure rules. Failing to do so could carry a prison sentence of up to five years.

The opposing argument is that cryptocurrencies are not securities because they don’t change in value based on any underlying factor such as a company’s profits. Instead, the limited supply means their value depends solely on demand and supply, making them commodities.

There’s also a school of thought that the SEC should regulate cryptocurrency issues, but impose looser regulations. While that’s even made it to proposed bills in Congress, there’s no clear sign they will succeed.