Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Insider Trading at Coinbase

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 348 posts

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#161

Post by notacoward »

tucnak wrote: post #129
tsimionescu wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Insider trading makes markets more efficient as the information enters the market earlier, allowing them to reach the correct price sooner. How exactly do you think this happens? If I know that a stock is about to rise significantly, I can just buy it at the current price all the way up to the day the information becomes public, and I will not have changed its price at all, but will profit massively off of my insid…

>The market will not reach the correct price until material information becomes public. Not if the EMH is true.

You're misunderstanding EMH. It does not include prescience. And BTW, it's generally not considered true except in its weakest forms.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#162

Post by qeternity »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #155
nojs wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the expected cycle of business long term. 1. Entrepreneur notices an opportunity to avoid overzealous regulations and provide better value to customers 2. Everyone wants a piece of the action, bad actors start to move in and updated regulation is required 3. New regulations get out of hand and start to become extremely costly to comply with (see banks) 4. New entrepreneur comes along with a novel way…

“Overzealous regulation” = regulation they prevents me as an “entrepreneur” from profiting off of unsophisticated people, in this example.

Who determines what qualifies as “unsophisticated”. This is where the overzealousness creeps in. Regulators always push for more regulations.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#163

Post by jakelazaroff »

datadata wrote: post #144
skybrian wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, being an accredited investor gives you exposure to investments that aren’t transparent. You don’t get the same access to financial statements as with public companies. If you want more transparent investments then you should be advocating for reforms that will encourage companies to go public sooner. This would be reversing the trend in recent years where companies stay private longer, which allows them to not di…

Accredited investor rules was an example of not having a even playing field. The market is not open to everyone which contributes to unfair outcomes. I'd welcome reforms to transparency as well there, as lack of transparency also contributes to unfair outcomes (the company can exploit investors).

The accredited investor rules are in place to protect people who can’t bear the losses from an extremely adversarial financial system. I promise you that even if you get rid of the rules, people with a few thousand dollars to spend still would not have access to the best investments.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#164

Post by lawrenceyan »

Traster wrote: post #156
lawrenceyan wrote: post #87

If you're jaded by web3, just imagine how people back in the day must have viewed web2. Now take a look at the the top 10 companies listed on the S&P 500.

This is literally the scam of Web3. Just because you name something Web3 doesn't mean it's going to become the next big thing. There is no relationship between the success of Web2 and what will happen with Web3. Do you know how I know that? Because Web3 was coined by Sir Tim Berners Lee in 2006 as the semantic web and it didn't go anywhere. "Oh well, you see web3 is like web2 + 1 and we know web1+1 was great so web2+…

Feel free to call them whatever you want. They're just words meant to abstract a concept / zeitgeist.

If I were to define the two respectively to someone who had never encountered the terms before, web2 would be the centralization of the early internet ecosystem in order to increase scalability + capture/generate profit funnels with web3 being the corresponding deconstruction back towards decentralization and economic distribution thanks to work on improved consensus algorithms in trustless settings.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#165

Post by skybrian »

datadata wrote: post #144
skybrian wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, being an accredited investor gives you exposure to investments that aren’t transparent. You don’t get the same access to financial statements as with public companies. If you want more transparent investments then you should be advocating for reforms that will encourage companies to go public sooner. This would be reversing the trend in recent years where companies stay private longer, which allows them to not di…

Accredited investor rules was an example of not having a even playing field. The market is not open to everyone which contributes to unfair outcomes. I'd welcome reforms to transparency as well there, as lack of transparency also contributes to unfair outcomes (the company can exploit investors).

Could you be clearer about what you mean by transparency? Do you think private companies should make their financial statements public? Do they need to be audited?

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#166

Post by wc- »

ricardolopes wrote: post #154
hmate9 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they don’t. You trade with other users not coinbase directly

That's not how coinbase operates. You have a "Buy " button, and you expect to get that coin without fail, every time. If a new token launches, you should be able to buy it without waiting for users to deposit and sell. Maybe you're confusing with coinbase pro, which uses the more traditional order book model, or with other exchanges?

Coinbase adds new assets to the pro option first, establishes a market, and then adds to the retail Coinbase "buy button" app. When a user hits the retail Buy Coin button, the internal market maker fills the order against the coinbase pro's order books.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#167

Post by jcranberry »

datadata wrote: post #144
skybrian wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, being an accredited investor gives you exposure to investments that aren’t transparent. You don’t get the same access to financial statements as with public companies. If you want more transparent investments then you should be advocating for reforms that will encourage companies to go public sooner. This would be reversing the trend in recent years where companies stay private longer, which allows them to not di…

Accredited investor rules was an example of not having a even playing field. The market is not open to everyone which contributes to unfair outcomes. I'd welcome reforms to transparency as well there, as lack of transparency also contributes to unfair outcomes (the company can exploit investors).

Accredited investing requirements are to keep non-experts or people without money to lose from being swindled by companies which aren't required to be transparent with their financials.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#168

Post by snarf21 »

sauwan wrote: post #78
chaosbolt wrote: post #75

I think Coinbase does fractional banking, I don't have any proof so not completely sure but you can judge yourself, this happened a few months ago: - nuCypher just randomly started going up on Binance - the price was still low on coinbase - the normal thing to do was to withdraw from coinbase and sell on binance "Oops withdrawal of nucypher is temporarily locked", it stayed locked for 8 hours, all the crypto subs on…

Couldn't this just be that they keep some amount in cold storage that's not super easily accessible?

They're an exchange. Cold Storage is not their job. It isn't much of an exchange if I have to wait 8 hours to put in a sell order.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#169

Post by reedjosh »

lxgr wrote: post #159
reedjosh wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just evil, but also, likely not terribly enforceable. It would just bring crypto back to its roots as a government resistant alt currency. Being uncontrollable was the whole point. Particularly regarding Bitcoin and Monero.

At least at this point in time, if you control all of the on/off-ramps, you can very effectively make any cryptocurrency non-viable as money.

I think it could slow adoption, but I've been primarily buying offline. Soon I'll have a lightning node too--improving my BTC privacy.

Defi exchanges are the next major advancement to government resistance as well. This space would rapidly mature under government regulating away self custody.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#170

Post by vimy »

lxgr wrote: post #158
vimy wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also: obligatory "not your keys, not your coins" and "don't keep your coins on an exchange". Unless lobbying can still stop it the EU parlement will outlaw self hosted wallets. Only coins on exchanges will be allowed.

> EU parlement will outlaw self hosted wallets Isn't it self-hosted anonymous wallets?

Yes but it’s gonna unworkable in practice to verify your own wallets. It’s a de facto ban.
Post reply on HN