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

Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#111

Post by baobabKoodaa »

wpietri wrote: post #8

I am truly grateful for people like Molly White, David Gerard, and Amy Castor. As the crypto grift circus expanded and expanded, I just got worn out. There was so much to pay attention to as it metastasized. All those writers have been diligently following it for years with a critical eye, and all of them have taken a lot of heat for it. As the wheels come off, it's great to have their detailed insights.

I don't like seeing Molly White and David Gerard in the same sentence. Molly White is a legit journalist with the mind of a scientist who cares about truth. David Gerard is a crank who will take any story and spin it to support his "crypto bad" narrative. They both like making fun of crypto, but that's about where the similarities end.

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#112

Post by the_gastropod »

detrites wrote: post #46
wpietri wrote: post #8

I am truly grateful for people like Molly White, David Gerard, and Amy Castor. As the crypto grift circus expanded and expanded, I just got worn out. There was so much to pay attention to as it metastasized. All those writers have been diligently following it for years with a critical eye, and all of them have taken a lot of heat for it. As the wheels come off, it's great to have their detailed insights.

There needs to be a differentiation between good and bad actors in this drama as opposed to the lazy and inaccurate idea of "the crypto grift". These recent billion-dollar grifts plaguing crypto have primarily been enabled by actors working steadfastly against all of crypto's core principles: decentralisation, secure your own money, no middle-man. These players are employing all of the same tactics enabled by the tra…

This boils down to what is essentially a "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument.

Yes. Crypto, itself, didn't necessarily carry out any of these frauds or scams. But the defining characteristics of cryptocurrency are inextricably intwined with the fraud people are able to perpetuate with it.

A gun's one and only purpose is to extinguish life. In the same way, Bitcoin's—and every cryptocurrency created since—one and only purpose is to skirt regulation. No one should be surprised by the outcomes of their adoption.

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#113

Post by notch656c »

wpietri wrote: post #109
notch656c wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the conditions that "necessitated" that someone with a $1B value mansion as their primary residence and $999,000 in the bank isn't qualified to invest in these securities while someone with $1,000,001 in the bank is?

Picking nits like this not only fails to advance the discussion, but in my opinion makes it worse. You can do the same thing with literally any rule. Why does one have to be 18 to buy cigarettes, an addictive product that will kill you if you use it long enough? Does something magically happen at age 17.9999 plus epsilon? Of course not. Regulations often draw arbitrary lines because that's a relatively easy way to im…

Presuming drawing arbitrary lines must improve a situation is probably the worst argument I've heard on HN and that's saying something. Also astonishing to call the difference between ~$1B in total wealth and ~$1M in wealth a "nit." I went out of my way to make sure the difference was far from a nit to show the absurdity so hey instead somebody just lied to make it sound practically the same, I love it.

>You can do the same thing with literally any...

I could marry any unwed woman or man who agrees, I could take any job who would have me. I could walk to any forest. I could.... Yes the fact that I could do it with any does not mean I shouldn't question the one I'm examining.

> you have missed or are ignoring that one can now pass a test to become an accredited investor, no capital requirements at all

If I want to be as cheeky as you I could characterize the cost of the licensure and/or exam as a capital requirement. Of course the $150 or whatever for the test, well in your mind the difference between ~$1B and ~$1M of wealth is jus a nit so hey they difference between $150 and $1M is just a nit and practically the same. I really dislike this kind of logic but hey it's the one you're playing so fair is fair.

>your point is also out of date.

.... we were talking about the accredited investors who were originally created in the Securities Act of you guessed it: 1933. Pardon me for doing exactly what they asked and looking at the "metaphorical blood" they insisted regulations were written in, you know the whole reason why "necessitated" was in the past tense because we were looking at history. You know this and this is a simple low effort tiresome deflection.

>can now pass a test

As an aside, not too keen in living in a society where if you have X amount of wealth defined in some way that you get to bypass following the law the same way as the poors who instead take a test to make sure they're worthy.

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#114

Post by detrites »

wpietri wrote: post #107
detrites wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because the fruits of those few well-intentioned founders labours aren't blasted on the news 24/7 like SBF was, doesn't mean they don't exist? I've seen people in parts of South America where the banking system can be completely unusable, using their phone to send and receive crypto payments cheaply and reliably, enabling them to safely transact with family. I've heard of this also happening in Africa. Others,…

One, I never said a good side didn't exist. In fact, I was careful to not say that. So easy on the straw men. Two, I have been hearing vague, anecdotal claims like this for years. It reminds me of how back in the day I would get vague, anecdotal claims for why open mail relays were useful to people. But if you want to claim a meaningful fraction of crypto activity is valuable in ways for which there are no equivalent…

First page of search results for "remittance" & "crypto" has numerous examples. At random, here's a referenced article covering Africa, South America & Asia: https://thenetworkstate.com/crypto-remittances

I invite you to use the amazing powers we have at our fingertips to find them yourself, and understand why something valued at two pizzas 13 years ago just had its max institutional hold increased from 1% to 2% by the BIS:

https://investing.com/news/cryptocurrency-news/bis-allows-ba...

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#115

Post by [deleted] »

notch656c wrote: post #60
lolinder wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crypto grift isn't limited to FTX, it's nearly everywhere in crypto. My great-uncle (who's constantly trying to find the one big break that'll make him rich) was working on starting a crypto token before everything collapsed. He is in his seventies and knows nothing about tech or finance, but he knew crypto was the place for people who want to make quick cash. The whole industry has become a haven for grifters. T…

The government made this thing called "accredited investor" which is just code for not one of the poors. I wish it wasn't necessary for the poors to use crypto to moonshot on various grifts.

[deleted]

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#117

Post by wpietri »

detrites wrote: post #114
wpietri wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One, I never said a good side didn't exist. In fact, I was careful to not say that. So easy on the straw men. Two, I have been hearing vague, anecdotal claims like this for years. It reminds me of how back in the day I would get vague, anecdotal claims for why open mail relays were useful to people. But if you want to claim a meaningful fraction of crypto activity is valuable in ways for which there are no equivalent…

First page of search results for "remittance" & "crypto" has numerous examples. At random, here's a referenced article covering Africa, South America & Asia: https://thenetworkstate.com/crypto-remittances I invite you to use the amazing powers we have at our fingertips to find them yourself, and understand why something valued at two pizzas 13 years ago just had its max institutional hold increased from 1% to 2% by t…

Thanks for telling me about this exciting new technology called "search", but it turns out that not only am I aware of it, I have been for quite a while. It is not my job to read random search results in hopes of finding some sort of data that demonstrates the value of crypto. I have already researched this a fair bit and have a provisional conclusion that suits me fine. If you would like your claims about it taken seriously, you can do the searching and collection and analysis and provide me with some results. If that doesn't interest you, that's fine by me.

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#118

Post by wpietri »

notch656c wrote: post #113
wpietri wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Picking nits like this not only fails to advance the discussion, but in my opinion makes it worse. You can do the same thing with literally any rule. Why does one have to be 18 to buy cigarettes, an addictive product that will kill you if you use it long enough? Does something magically happen at age 17.9999 plus epsilon? Of course not. Regulations often draw arbitrary lines because that's a relatively easy way to im…

Presuming drawing arbitrary lines must improve a situation is probably the worst argument I've heard on HN and that's saying something. Also astonishing to call the difference between ~$1B in total wealth and ~$1M in wealth a "nit." I went out of my way to make sure the difference was far from a nit to show the absurdity so hey instead somebody just lied to make it sound practically the same, I love it. >You can do t…

> Presuming drawing arbitrary lines must improve a situation is probably the worst argument I've heard on HN and

That is not a claim I made. If that's the best you can do, I'm tapping out here.

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#119

Post by quickthrowman »

stouset wrote: post #103
notch656c wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is society better off when I'm allowed to drop bands on the truck stop stripper instead of buying toys for my kid? The individual should not be forced at all steps to selflessly act in the benefit of society. There are a non-zero number of scenarios where unregistered securities have paid off to investors. Individuals should not be forced at every step to prove their acts benefit collectively society.

Because society has a demonstrated track record of "actively letting people get scammed en masse" resulting in widespread misery and an enormously disproportionate number of resources needing to be committed to enforcement, and the current status quo—while inarguably suboptimal—is clearly an improvement? The libertarian ideal is akin to assuming that people are frictionless spheres operating in a vacuum instead of re…

> Because society has a demonstrated track record of "actively letting people get scammed en masse" resulting in widespread misery and an enormously disproportionate number of resources needing to be committed to enforcement

Hell, people getting scammed en masse caused a civil war in Albania in 1997. Not even 30 years ago!

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

Re: Annotated: Sam Bankman-Fried's “FTX Pre-Mortem Overview”

#120

Post by wpietri »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #111
wpietri wrote: post #8

I am truly grateful for people like Molly White, David Gerard, and Amy Castor. As the crypto grift circus expanded and expanded, I just got worn out. There was so much to pay attention to as it metastasized. All those writers have been diligently following it for years with a critical eye, and all of them have taken a lot of heat for it. As the wheels come off, it's great to have their detailed insights.

I don't like seeing Molly White and David Gerard in the same sentence. Molly White is a legit journalist with the mind of a scientist who cares about truth. David Gerard is a crank who will take any story and spin it to support his "crypto bad" narrative. They both like making fun of crypto, but that's about where the similarities end.

That's quite a take in that White doesn't talk about herself as a journalist but a programmer who does some writing, whereas Gerard has been writing articles and books about this since 2016 and sees himself as a journalist. As do I, for what it's worth.

Anyhow, as somebody who has reading them for years, I think they both have equally negative takes about crypto, although Gerard is certainly more salty about it. I think of him more in the English tradition of journalism, which is much more flavorful then the standard American stuff.

And regardless, Gerard's "'crypto bad' narrative" has been proven much, much more accurate than both pro-crypto partisans and nominally crypto-neutral mainstream journalists, whose naivete has helped a lot of their readers lose a lot of money.

Post reply on HN