Ha. $90 million?! Yeah I’ll pay the taxes. And please do doxx me.
If he thinks this would work then he’s either stupid or it went out in tiny chunks that are not “f** you” money.
Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
101–110 of 127 posts
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#102I think its pretty telling about the state of defi. That a CEO of a defi project thinks that threatening to make people pay the taxes they should already be paying is some sort of leverage. If I were running the IRS I'd be looking at Robert Leshner to make sure he's paying all the taxes he should be on his crypto given that he thinks that threatening to report trades to the IRS(that he already should be doing) will m…
I doubt he can actually find out who they are. It's just a nonsense tweet.
Nobody who uses Compound sends them KYC information, it's all just addresses on the blockchain, which is public data that the IRS can read just as well as Compound can. (And unlike Compound, the IRS can subpoena centralized exchanges to trace who's behind the addresses.)
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good thing precisely zero people are proposing this for "all financial infrastructure". It's an opt-in alternative, nothing more. If you don't want to use it, nothing forces you to (unlike existing retail banking).
This is an irrelevant point and borderline strawman. Considering the environmental impact of proof of stake blockchains, everyone is impacted whether they use crypto or not.
The environmental impact of proof of stake blockchains is virtually nonexistent.
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good thing precisely zero people are proposing this for "all financial infrastructure". It's an opt-in alternative, nothing more. If you don't want to use it, nothing forces you to (unlike existing retail banking).
Do the people opting in truly appreciate that one software bug could empty their account?
Most all of the people in defi do, yes. It's happened a number of times now, so you'd have to work pretty hard to understand enough to use defi but not be aware of the risks.
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#105I think its pretty telling about the state of defi. That a CEO of a defi project thinks that threatening to make people pay the taxes they should already be paying is some sort of leverage. If I were running the IRS I'd be looking at Robert Leshner to make sure he's paying all the taxes he should be on his crypto given that he thinks that threatening to report trades to the IRS(that he already should be doing) will m…
He said they were "doxxed", which means things like "you have told people your identity and your wallet's public address"
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire question is whether this executed smart contract will be treated as an actual binding contract. I see no reason why it should not be - parties entered into it freely for adequate consideration. Parties were well aware they were entering into a contract ("smart contract"), and by the technical format of the contract did contemplate that they could end up with an unfavorable result due to "bugs" or other unf…
> I see no reason why it should not be I'm arguing the opposite. Your assertion is that a smart contract will be treated as a binding contract. Provide case law and statute that that is the case. Your belief at the moment is hope that a smart contract will be interpreted favorably by the judiciary. If you can't provide such citations, backing your assertions, it seems disingenuous to attempt to twist contract law to…
There is no case law or statute declaring it permissible to write down a contract on a piece of drywall in French, yet it would be safe to assume that doing so would be valid. Courts generally grant wide leeway to private parties to contract how they'd like. These parties chose to enter into a contract with a highly formal definition - with all its benefits and drawbacks.
In short, I think you're the one arguing uphill. In what way does this smart contract fail to meet the standards of a bona fide contract?
The only thing I can see from you in this thread is that the "sender didn't mean to". But this isn't some value transfer external to the contract, but rather due to operation of the contract that the CEO did intend to enter (the purchaser of an options contract similarly doesn't intend to lose money). So restating that in the framework of the contract would be something like the CEO didn't contemplate the possibility of a bug causing a significant loss. I could see that having legs in the case of investors losing money, but isn't the losing party here the one that drafted the contract?
edit: I didn't delete my comment. I've got delay = 5 in my profile, and I guess there's a way you can see my comment before 5 minutes are up? It might be cleaner if you move your reply to a separate comment.
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#107This bug happened to the crypto project Compound. I work for a crypto company that has a DeFi product that uses Compound. So I've been deep into following this since it started. The funds sent to users were "rewards" for using the platform. Compound didn't actually lose any user funds, it was Compound's "governance token" that was given out. Although user funds were not affected, billions of dollars have been pulled…
The fact that you can give away millions by mistake and do nothing about it then break the systems then do not much about it says a lot about crypto currency practicality ;) I wonder when this madness is going to stop.
Your comment reminds me of that xkcd: wow you suck at math vs wow girls suck at math, where girls equals crypto.
1 crypto project out of thousands does not represent them all.
the reason this tweet is even being discussed is because it is so unusual.
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#108This guy is a clown. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer person /s
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#109> Tweet may have been deleted Why use twitter's widget instead of copying the text content of the tweet?
Usually, it's copyright on images and TOS problems
Re: Crypto CEO threatens customers after mistakenly sending them millions
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it fraud if the smart contract allowed it? Actually curious what makes it fraud. Just because one group wants the money back?
Lawful intention. What the smart contract dictates isn’t necessarily the final authority, but what the intent was (per legal interpretation of state contract law).
The intention of the parties was that the smart contract was enforced exactly as the smart contract was written: if that turns out to be unexpectedly disadvantageous for a party, then that's their problem.