Insider Trading at Coinbase • Hacker News Board

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#341

Post by MrMan » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 9:49 AM UTC

perihelions wrote: post #10

Is this insider trading according to the law? Nonpublic information isn't being used to trade public stocks; it's being used to trade assets that don't appear to be regulated securities.

before crypto there was a market phenomenon that I personally have no knowledge of but an acquaintance at a big bank which facilitated a lot of FX trading was very happy at one point that he was sent to Japan, where retail FX trading had become a huge fad, like crypto now. He was a prop trader for the bank and made a lot of his money going against retail traders. Presumably it was exploiting information asymmetries, partly, but probably also just simply harvesting fees and spreads.

everything old is new again

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#342

Post by dzamo_norton » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 11:44 AM UTC

datadata wrote: post #236

drekk wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in fintech. I'm not sure what bank regulations you think are overzealous. To give an example, banks can legally keep you from accessing your data. Whether by blocking your screen scraping or providing an API with poor coverage. You understand I imagine that the regulations don't use the word "unsophisticated" and as such it's a red herring. We have these (few) regulations because banks and their consumers are…

Could you share a citation for your claim of "laughably tiny adoption"? What data are you looking at to reach this perspective?

A definition of "adoption" would also help here. Are we counting the zero-sum game speculators as "adopters", or are we counting something like flows enabling the legally compliant exchange of goods and services in the real world?

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#343

Post by MegaButts » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 12:53 PM UTC

MrMan wrote: post #340

MegaButts wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absurd. If you make a bet that you're unable to honor which forces you to shut down the market, you've lost control. If they can't account for this then they can't account for the trades they're supposed to honor. Yes, it's literally their job to account for situations like this. They failed. Pointing out how insane the situation was only points out how poorly they predicted what might happen with private inf…

you should learn from the seabird, instead of railing against stuff you dont understand.

We both think the other is an idiot. I'm going to trust my friends that are securities lawyers and professional traders over an internet stranger regurgitating commonly held misunderstandings on how the market works. Believe whatever you want.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#344

Post by seabird » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 1:50 PM UTC

MegaButts wrote: post #343

MrMan wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you should learn from the seabird, instead of railing against stuff you dont understand.

We both think the other is an idiot. I'm going to trust my friends that are securities lawyers and professional traders over an internet stranger regurgitating commonly held misunderstandings on how the market works. Believe whatever you want.

For whatever it's worth, I don't think you're an idiot. It just sounds like you think a clearinghouse can do a lot of things that they cannot do.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#345

Post by joshsyn » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 3:04 PM UTC

bobsomers wrote: post #302

parkingrift wrote: post #107

Crypto fans want deregulated finance. Crypto fans get mad when deregulated finance is comically unfair. You really can’t make this up. Embrace this. It’s exactly what crypto is all about.

> Crypto fans want deregulated finance. Crypto fans get mad when deregulated finance is comically unfair. I don't think this is a fair characterization. Most crypto fans I know want regulations, they just want them clearly defined and enforced with software and distributed consensus rather than through corrupt and ineffective organizations like the SEC.

nope not me.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#346

Post by MegaButts » Thu, Apr 14, 2022, 10:03 PM UTC

seabird wrote: post #344

MegaButts wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We both think the other is an idiot. I'm going to trust my friends that are securities lawyers and professional traders over an internet stranger regurgitating commonly held misunderstandings on how the market works. Believe whatever you want.

For whatever it's worth, I don't think you're an idiot. It just sounds like you think a clearinghouse can do a lot of things that they cannot do.

I apologize for calling you an idiot - that was a bit much on my part. I still disagree and don't want to continue the conversation, but saying "you don't understand" is different from an accusation that you're incapable of understanding.

Agree to disagree. Cheers.

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#347

Post by elefanten » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 1:17 AM UTC

beaconstudios wrote: post #20

elefanten wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you think this on what basis? Engagement with the space, or your emotional knee jerk reactions to the occasional headline you read? This comment comes across utterly unserious.

Based on both my observations of the space and interaction with crypto people and the crypto market. I know people who work in crypto too. Your defensive kneejerk reaction doesn't serve as an opposing argument - if you think differently, all you need to do is provide some evidence.

You asserted comically sweeping claims about an entire industry and nascent family of technologies being solely rooted in “scams” and “schemes”.

Those two words usually have a higher burden of proof… unless you’re just putting on a rhetorical performance, that is. QED “unserious”

Re: Insider Trading at Coinbase

#348

Post by lawrenceyan » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

valeness wrote: post #214

lawrenceyan wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 economi…

But you have no evidence of this. You're just saying "This thing I like will be big because I like it" Web2 had a lot of stars align to become "the next big thing". (The newfound capacity for advertising, smartphones driving adoption, and the mechanisms for tracking and stealing user data). And none of those stars had to deal with privacy, decentralization, security, encryption, etc. All of these things that we have…

Sorry for the late reply, I really wish HN had a notification setting for replies.

I agree, web3 most likely means less profit to the corporation since the majority of economic value will accrue to the token / ecosystem instead. But it's innovate now or be outcompeted inevitably.

The main selling point of blockchains is that they make governance / economic distribution seamless. That's not dismantling capitalism. Much of what enables consensus in a blockchain requires similar incentive mechanisms to function, in my opinion.