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

The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 748 posts

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#471

Post by kweingar »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #445
massysett wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…

On this note I am curious if political organisations will be required to give back the donations he made. It seems the right thing if they were stolen funds. But being politicians I'm curious if it will be rules for thee and not for me.

I wonder if the charities will have to give back their funding.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#472

Post by SoftTalker »

andirk wrote: post #432
naniwaduni wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most systems don't have a Y10k issue: year numbers are variable-width already. Forcing a fixed-width 5-digit representation is creating a Y100k issue.

Never made sense how any software would consider the year value as _two characters_ when an integer works far better. There's even a 0 epoch date for crying out loud.

Early mainframes read data on punch cards or tape files which were character-based (or possibly, binary-coded decimal). Two digits were used for the year to save memory.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#473

Post by kjellsbells »

humanizersequel wrote: post #460
joeblubaugh wrote: post #455

Is there going to be any reckoning for the VCs who poured money into this ridiculous business? I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.

>I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this. Me neither, sounds like that's the reckoning.

Helpfully, sequoia list who they are investing in, e.g.

https://www.sequoiacap.com/our-companies/?_categories=fintec...

or

https://www.sequoiacap.com/our-companies/?_categories=crypto

And of course you should all enjoy this while you can:

https://www.sequoiacap.com/companies/ftx/

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#474

Post by humanizersequel »

anonporridge wrote: post #410
Aunche wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is mainstream media being sensationalist per usual. This is what the original Coindesk article wrote. "They appeared to oscillate between dejection and defiance, at times holding their heads in their hands and clasping their hands. Bankman-Fried’s mother audibly laughed several times when her son was referred to as a “fugitive” and his father occasionally put his fingers in his ears as if to drown out the sound…

Lol. When Coindesk is bringing more nuanced news reporting than CNBC, you know things are whack.

I wasn't acquainted with them until roughly 6 months ago, but from what I've seen Coindesk has actually been an excellent publication.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#475

Post by [deleted] »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #461
massysett wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is opportunity cost. People invested in Madoff to grow their money. So if I invest $100 in Madoff and ten years later they say “we recovered $90, congrats,” yeah that’s better than nothing. But if I had put that into a legitimate investment, maybe I’d have $180. Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” So much of crypt…

> Other folks got money out of Madoff during his scam years, and the trustee says “I’m taking that money back to pay back others.” What’s the limit on that? Dollars or time? I would be beyond furious if I was expected to help make someone else whole.

[deleted]

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#476

Post by antonvs »

andirk wrote: post #432
naniwaduni wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most systems don't have a Y10k issue: year numbers are variable-width already. Forcing a fixed-width 5-digit representation is creating a Y100k issue.

Never made sense how any software would consider the year value as _two characters_ when an integer works far better. There's even a 0 epoch date for crying out loud.

Because when the Y2K problem was created, computers had only recently been invented, every byte counted, and there was no history of software best practices.

Even by 1980, which was 5 years before any recorded mention of the Y2K problem, an IBM mainframe, of the kind a university might have, had only e.g. 4 MB of main memory, which had to support many concurrent users.

Such computers would have been unable to load even a single typical binary produced by a modern language like Go or Rust into its memory - yet they supported dozens of concurrent users and processes, doing everything from running accounting batch jobs, compiling and running programs in Assembler, COBOL, FORTRAN, PL/I, or APL, and running interactive sessions in languages like LISP or BASIC. Part of how they achieved all that was not wasting any bytes they didn’t absolutely have to.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#477

Post by legulere »

Y_Y wrote: post #405
AmericanChopper wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During my first week in my first programming job I remember overhearing a senior engineer saying “don’t worry, there’s not another leap year for 2 years”. I was still working there on February 29, he wasn’t. It was a stressful day. My condolences go out to the engineers who will be working on January 1st 100000.

Surely by then we'll have had a powerful enough pope to rename the months at least once.

My hope is that some programmer dictator will instate a form of the discordian calender:

- All 5 seasons are the same length - The days of the year always fall on the same week day, as the week is 5 days long - the year always starts with the first day of the week. - the leap day is not assigned a day

Things I would change though: - start the year at winter solstice. - put the leap day at the end of the year.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discordian_calendar

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#478

Post by jacquesm »

joeblubaugh wrote: post #455

Is there going to be any reckoning for the VCs who poured money into this ridiculous business? I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.

> I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.

Same for a16z, Softbank and all the others that jumped on the crypto bandwagon without doing their jobs as board members and during the run-up to the deal and after investing.

Ironically, the VCs will position themselves as the victims.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#479

Post by lalaland1125 »

smeej wrote: post #438

When do you think we'll start seeing the politicians who received SBF's illegal campaign finance contributions insisting on returning them to FTX customers so as to be above suspicion or reproach?

The big issue is that money has already been spent

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#480

Post by sam345 »

joeblubaugh wrote: post #455

Is there going to be any reckoning for the VCs who poured money into this ridiculous business? I don’t see how you respect Sequoia’s judgement after this.

I'm just enjoying their humiliation and reputation hit. Enjoying only so much as it is the correct free market result of betting big without [edited] due diligence. Some of it is result of fed priming the economy with free money. With so much money being dropped from the helicopter there's no time for due diligence. You win some you lose some so in that sense it was a rational bet I guess but not an intelligent one.
Post reply on HN