DOJ: Hackers broke into an SEC database and made millions from inside info

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 10:14 PM UTC

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #120

gtirloni wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean they rely solely on someone dictating a SSN number? That's insane. They should ask for a official ID with photo, as the very minimum. Is that something that goes against the American culture? The other day I had to give all 10 fingerprints to renew my driver's license (location: South America) and nobody seemed to care.

> Is that something that goes against the American culture? Conservative Christian fundamentalist groups have, ever since Reagan, likened a national ID card to "the mark of the beast", citing Revelation 13's prophecy that no one could buy or sell goods without the number of the beast, and the reference to God's chosen people that refuse the mark of the Beast. When a small but meaningful fraction of your constituents…

Post by scott_s » Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 10:35 PM UTC

all_blue_chucks wrote: post #102

wildmusings wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that trading spikes in advance of public availability of news doesn't necessarily imply illegal activity. Overheard conversations between strangers, for example, are fair game.

> Overheard conversations between strangers, for example, are fair game. Wrong. It's insider trading if you have material, nonpublic information. It doesn't matter how you got that information.

Post by OldManAndTheCpp » Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

zepearl wrote: post #124

hkmurakami wrote: post #95

Related reading: today's Matt Levine piece on how hard it is to make money even with this info. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-01-16/even-c...

Thank you for the nice link - is this guy (Matt Levine) somehow generally "known" for some reason? I liked the articles but it's the first time I hear the name. Edit: thanks a lot for your hints/replies!

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 10:45 PM UTC

ben509 wrote: post #118

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, we need some fairness in a market American insider trading law has nothing to do with fairness. It is based on theft of information. In this case, the hacker’s stole information from the SEC that belonged to the reporting companies. (This is a commonly misunderstood alley of securities law.)

That's interesting. I was digging around, and this piece[1] goes into detail, but early on they summarized the rationale for insider trading laws. "One objection is that it violates the fiduciary duties that corporate employees, as agents, owe to their principals, the shareholders (Wilgus 1910)." That supports the theft formulation. "A related objection is that, because managers control the production of, disclosure…

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jan 16, 2019, 10:50 PM UTC

zepearl wrote: post #126

ChuckMcM wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also like his take on the WeWork fiasco.

Is it a fiasco or is it just "shady business" but still successful? Really just asking because I never heard about that company but saw a few days ago a post about its split into different sectors all having their names starting with "We..." and did not dig further (and I did not find anything useful today using my keywords).