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

FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 890 posts

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#451

Post by crypt1d »

rvba wrote: post #431
crypt1d wrote: post #420

This last week has been a rollercoaster. I've been in crypto since a long time ago and have seen quite a bit, but this FTX implosion takes the crown. And to be honest, I don't think its over.

What is the difference between this, terraluna earlier this year or MTGox?

Luna was quite bad, but it was pretty straight-forward path to death that everyone saw from a mile away. Not many people predicted that FTX and SBF will fall from grace within a timespan of 48hrs. The whole thing is also so full of scandals, theft and corruption we will be reading about this in the news for weeks to come.

mtGox was so early in crypto, there wasn't any institutional capital or major players, mostly retail/regular folks experimenting with shiny new tech. FTX is an intermingled web of retail, institutions and big name investors as well as having their own investments, huge donations to politicians, lobbying arm, etc. The fallout from this will set us back for years.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#452

Post by baq »

douglaswlance wrote: post #133
YossarianFrPrez wrote: post #116

Regardless of whether you are pro- or anti- crypto, the collapse of FTX, SBF's bubble bursting in a rather extreme fashion, and now this hack are more nails in the coffin for mainstream support. I am no fan of crypto myself, but it's interesting to think what would have to happen for crypto to burnish its image. Would key people have to voluntarily form some sort of coordinating council and self-regulate? Would they…

This isn't a crypto failure. Crypto works. This is a human failure. FTX didn't collapse because of the technology. It collapsed because of human error. The fix is rather simple. If an organization looks like a bank and quacks like a bank; it should be regulated like a bank.

The fraud going on in there was not human error. Reuters wrote about a backdoor sbf used to make transactions with ftx assets off the books, without alerting controls. If this is true, it’s oceans eleven stuff.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#453

Post by cdiddy2 »

vishnugupta wrote: post #392
eastbound wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) To recover, a crypto will probably need to include specs about how the exchange should run. Exchanges have failed 3-4 times, and it seems they’re part of a currency since people keep coming back to them. So there needs to be a system where I keep having control over my coins while they’re in an exchange: ability to withdraw from the exchange, ability to approve a transaction.

All of this is a solved problem in equity exchanges world. Escrows, SPIC etc. No need to reinvent a wheel that was invented after learning from so much of pain. So regulators either come down heavily on these exchanges or they will let retailers continue to get conned.

Its a solved problem in crypto too. Shapeshift allowed for swapping of funds while always having control of the keys, but it was given hell by regulators. If it were allowed to grow maybe things like ftx wouldnt have gotten so big

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#454

Post by cdiddy2 »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #281
px43 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ponzi schemes by definition use opaque ledgers. Ponzi schemes are custodial. Ponzi schemes guarantee returns. There exist Ponzi schemes which have disguised themselves as cryptocurrencies, but the idea that all cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes demonstrates a complete ignorance of what a Ponzi scheme is.

> Ponzi schemes by definition use opaque ledgers. Why? To me a ponzi scheme is where the earlier "investors" get paid out with the money of later "investors". That's it. By that definition it's quite the "decentralized", somewhat stochastic ponzi.

your definition includes stocks. I suppose you might be right that stocks are a ponzi

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#455

Post by przeor »

ForHackernews wrote: post #430
zeven7 wrote: post #4

> Investigating abnormalities with wallet movements related to consolidation of ftx balances across exchanges - unclear facts as other movements not clear. Will share more info as soon as we have it. From FTX's general counsel[1], retweeted by FTX_Official. So that indicates it's not being sold off legitimately under some sort of liquidation proceedings. It could be insiders or it could be hackers. [1] https://twitte…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#456

Post by plasticchris »

Gasp0de wrote: post #442
sgt101 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that they said they would pay 8% interest on your funds. Which I guess makes it quite attractive. A discord server I was on in the spring had people offering advice on how to get this... I just assumed it was a scam, perhaps other people weren't so cautious.

I mean it should be obvious that anyone who offers 8% interest has to do some high-risk stuff with your funds, right?

Not always, I bonds were offering more earlier this year

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#457

Post by dools »

dang wants everyone to be thoughtful and curious with our comments.

It’s absurd that anyone is still giving crypto anything but derision.

It’s like someone posted a flat earth website and dang is like “hey let’s hear them out”.

Forget about it.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#458

Post by paulgb »

irusensei wrote: post #380
grumpyprole wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> BTC (on chain) is still working as intended, after all these years. It's certainly working on destroying the planet with its obscene energy requirements.

Energy which was paid for. If there is a problem with that then price it accordingly.

Nobody has the power to unilaterally “set the price” of energy, it’s set by the market.

Free markets are great for a lot of things, but pricing in externalities isn’t one of them.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#459

Post by qeternity »

anm89 wrote: post #407

It's pretty astounding that there was essentially no volatility in crypto markets along with this. To the point of being fishy.

It shouldn’t be astounding. The entire crypto market is controlled by a handful of powerful entities. It goes up when they want it to, and it goes down when they want it to.

It crashes when they lose control, as they did earlier in the year. But at this point I don’t believe there’s enough riding on FTX that they’ve lost control again.

FTX is a story of retail and normies getting rinsed. But that’s zero sum. Who do you think ended up on the other side of the equation? Those people are in a decent position.

Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M

#460

Post by maccard »

zeroclip wrote: post #438

Restating my comment from Celsius unwinding one month ago: Three clear and obvious outcomes of this unwinding: 1. The crypto mantra "not your keys, not your coins" rings true. 2. Entrusting your personal financial data with a private company is sure to end in disaster, either by hack or court order. Privacy should be a basic and legally protected feature of blockchains. 3. Centralized Finance or CeFi is mostly a sham…

> The crypto mantra "not your keys, not your coins" rings true.

Until crypto has a workable solution to this that doesn't rely on me keeping paper copies of my master key in a safe, it's not really viable for the masses without exchanges like coinbase and co.

> Entrusting your personal financial data with a private company is sure to end in disaster, either by hack or court order

Hard disagree here. In all my years of interacting with private companies they have always protected my money, even when it was taken from me fraudulently.

> Centralized Finance or CeFi is mostly a sham and deserves to be heavily regulated.

I dunno, cefi works pretty well for me.

Of course the difference is that the cefi institutes and private companies are regulated traditional banks.

> Privacy should be a basic and legally protected feature of blockchains.

For a decentralised system that touts it's benefits as not being tamperable, a legal protection is worthless. If we require legal protections for blockchains what value does that prove over a centralised regulated system? Also, as it's decentralised and privacy focused there's nothing stopping someone in a country with a different interpretation of "legal protection" being involved.

>We haven’t seen privacy and KYC be an issue yet

We absolutely have, with AML checks. Try cashing out 100k of crypto and using it as a deposit for a mortgage with a bank or lender, and see how open to it they are. This has been the case for at least 3-4 years here in the UK.

Post reply on HN