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

What Happened at Alameda Research

milkyeggs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 437 posts

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#31

Post by ZeroGravitas »

I liked the chapter in Nate Sivers' Signal and the Noise when he talks about how hard it is to know if you're a good professional poker player.

Been a while since I read it but feel like even after a couple of years of winning games and tracking his own performance, he had enough stats knowledge to realise that he didn't actually know if he was good or just lucky. The noise swamped the signal.

This feels relevant to many of these trading things where people start to believe their own BS.

If you've flipped a coin and it's came up heads 10 times in a row, why wouldn't you bet everything on it happening again? You're really good at getting heads when you flip. Humans aren't really built for that kind of thing.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#32

Post by lawrenceyan »

gillesjacobs wrote: post #3

I like how OP opens smugly by calling the NYT article a fluff piece, then proceeds to immediately cite anonymous Twitter anecdotes as better sources. He's right about the specific NYT article not including much pertinent information, but they're a serious journalistic publication and have verification standards for sources.

The person who wrote this post is pretty well known in the crypto space. Not saying that what was written here is guaranteed to be accurate, but it's likely to be much closer to reality than what the New York Times put out.

To be clear, I enjoyed Levine's commentary on the situation so it's not just because I dislike mainstream publications.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#33

Post by highwaylights »

lzooz wrote: post #24

Quoted post unavailable.

Not planning to, but this still really saddens me.

You can have grievances about what happened here (and I'm sure many do), but the overtly sexual attacks on Caroline Ellison should disgust us all.

This isn't a defence of anyone's actions. If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated and prosecuted. If no crime has been committed, maybe regulation should be introduced - or maybe people should learn a valuable lesson about what happens when you go out of your way to engage in investments that derive their gains from dodging consumer protection regulations.

In any case, the attacks on Caroline Ellison reflect really badly on the worst stereotypes of Crypto Bros as a whole - even though I'm certain it's a tiny minority of people involved in them.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#34

Post by blitzar »

nl wrote: post #21
TotoHorner wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The New York Times piece is even worse, since it paints a misleading picture of SBF and his cronies losing all the money accidentally rather than malice (far more likely).

Actually it's almost the opposite. This piece speculates very strongly about SBF's stimulant usage degradating his cognitive abilities. Eg: > If the above observations about SBF’s personality and competence are even half true, that would go a great deal toward explaining Alameda’s losses. The entire article goes into much further depth. But it doesn't even speculate about malice.

"their systems became unprofitable" - "Alameda & FTX jointly continued to lose large amounts of money" - "uncompetitive market-making strategies, risky lending practices" - "erratic behavior and unprofitable gambling".

> losing all the money accidentally rather than malice (far more likely)

They sound an awful lot like trading / accidental losses than malice to me.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#35

Post by blitzar »

TedShiller wrote: post #25
gillesjacobs wrote: post #3

I like how OP opens smugly by calling the NYT article a fluff piece, then proceeds to immediately cite anonymous Twitter anecdotes as better sources. He's right about the specific NYT article not including much pertinent information, but they're a serious journalistic publication and have verification standards for sources.

Quoted post unavailable.

Yeah it was in the basement of a pizza place right?

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#36

Post by SilverBirch »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #19
gillesjacobs wrote: post #3

I like how OP opens smugly by calling the NYT article a fluff piece, then proceeds to immediately cite anonymous Twitter anecdotes as better sources. He's right about the specific NYT article not including much pertinent information, but they're a serious journalistic publication and have verification standards for sources.

If you had been following this whole saga at all you would know that Twitter anons have been a way better source of information than anyone else. The on-chain anaylsis, digging and commentary done by people on Twitter has been insanely insightful.

Twitter might provide more information than the NYT, but there's a reason NYT doesn't publish it - because the NYT wants to be reliable. They want their claims to actually stand up to scrutiny and be an accurate portrayal of the events we know happened. Whereas big chunks of this article are just pure speculation. The whole section about how Alameda might have had a rogue algo are just made up out of whole cloth. Is it true? Who knows, there's certainly no evidence for it, but let's stick it down as $1Bn of loss anyway.

This article is very little more than just a gossip rag version of the NYT article.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#37

Post by highwaylights »

PeterStuer wrote: post #10

I find it curious Musk was able to snif out SBF as a bullshit artist in his 30 min. Meeting with him, whereas countless polititions and regulators aparently did not have a clue despite years of meetings and other contacts.

Yeah that never happened. The only thing clear from those messages was that he wanted the money and was simply asking if the guy was good for the cash.

Musk and the religion that's built up around him in recent years exist in two separate realities.

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#38

Post by lzooz »

highwaylights wrote: post #33
lzooz wrote: post #24

Quoted post unavailable.

Not planning to, but this still really saddens me. You can have grievances about what happened here (and I'm sure many do), but the overtly sexual attacks on Caroline Ellison should disgust us all. This isn't a defence of anyone's actions. If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated and prosecuted. If no crime has been committed, maybe regulation should be introduced - or maybe people should learn a va…

What the fuck is a "sexual attack"

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#39

Post by binarray2000 »

kristianov wrote: post #4

Two words: Ponzi Scheme.

I’d say that Madoff was a Ponzi Scheme. It seems, what Bankman-Fried et al have pulled off was more of stealing other people’s money and probably washing money, both for political purposes. They have donated other people’s money to Dem’s and have paid visits to the Biden White House. And, considering how billions have been sent to one of the most corrupt countries in the world (Ukraine; according to Transparency), I am not the first one to think that probably some of that money was laundered and used for elections or even for personal gain. It wouldn’t be the first time (Hunter’s “Laptop from hell”).

(I am not an US American. And I don’t care for either the Democrats nor the Republicans.)

Re: What Happened at Alameda Research

#40

Post by highwaylights »

Gigachad wrote: post #16
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And worse: pretty much everyone was aware of it, but thought that because they were aware of it and everyone else is a schmuck, they could benefit from it. Some did, but only if they liquidated their holdings last year. NFTs this year was a microcosm of exactly that. Loads of people jumped on the bandwagon, buying up NFTs as they were released, but the whole thing collapsed again when it turned out the resale market…

NFTs were like all cryptos. _Everyone_ knew they were bullshit but expected there would be one more greedy idiot to pass the bag to.

Unsure why this is downvoted.

"lol at you spending all your money on magic beans, not like my magic beans which are very shiny and special."

Post reply on HN