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

FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 226 posts

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#121

Post by VagueMag »

graeme wrote: post #95

I looked into this. They used to do business as Geniome Bank, and their job ads are for "crypto and marijuana". Almost no publicity, though they sponsored a few marijuana events. Chalopin usually shies away from press, so his personal involvement is odd. His son is also the chief digital officer of the company. Another curiosity is the old Farmington team is still there, including the presdient, and they still appear…

It's a very "wow the simulation is running wild" sensation to see that someone who helped create a Keystone Kops-style cartoon I loved as a kid is at the center of all this stuff where the regulators and investigators are seemingly totally out to lunch.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#122

Post by bioemerl »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #23
fisherjeff wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but personally, I am much more interested in what he has to say now than I was pre-collapse.

Yes, but you also seem to know more about the story than the average person. When SBF lies or gaslights, you can see right through it. Different story for the average listener, who will be listening to most interactions with an open mind and susceptible to whichever person tends to be more charming or persuasive.

I'm not a fan of protecting people from themselves. Let them speak.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#123

Post by stephc_int13 »

greesil wrote: post #117
skrebbel wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m still baffled that this kind of corruption isn’t frowned upon more. People are buying influence. How is that supposed to be OK or normal?

Unavoidable now because of the Citizens United court decision. Of course it's bad, but what are you gonna do?

Make noise about it.

If you believe this is wrong, that is.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#124

Post by skrebbel »

greesil wrote: post #117
skrebbel wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m still baffled that this kind of corruption isn’t frowned upon more. People are buying influence. How is that supposed to be OK or normal?

Unavoidable now because of the Citizens United court decision. Of course it's bad, but what are you gonna do?

I don’t know, it’s not this prevalent everywhere so it is possible.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#126

Post by graeme »

bombcar wrote: post #118
graeme wrote: post #95

I looked into this. They used to do business as Geniome Bank, and their job ads are for "crypto and marijuana". Almost no publicity, though they sponsored a few marijuana events. Chalopin usually shies away from press, so his personal involvement is odd. His son is also the chief digital officer of the company. Another curiosity is the old Farmington team is still there, including the presdient, and they still appear…

There have been a number of cases in fintech of basically “buying” a banking license by buying some small bank.

That would appear to be the case here, with the difference being that the purchaser in this case is a foreign bank known for its ties to a large criminal enterprise (Tether/Bitfinex)

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#127

Post by m348e912 »

eli wrote: post #43
Overtonwindow wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. If a tough reporter really nails him down with a tough interview, it could be a shining moment for journalism. If they fawn over him, as some have suggested of recent coverage, then it will be a failure. The NYT should keep him, dare him to show up, and then do their jobs: Hold his feet to the fire.

The summits are about making money not news.

Even if it is a money-making endeavor, the NYT could slightly mend its journalistic reputation with some hard-hitting questions to SBF. They have been soft-handed so far in their reporting on SBF and FTX and it reeks of major bias and conflict of interest.

In case anyone doesn't know what I am referring to, here is some background.

https://www.publish0x.com/making-cents/whats-wrong-with-the-...

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#128

Post by dmix »

brookst wrote: post #85
dmix wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting people kicked off speaking events is a common 'deplatforming' tactic.

Great. Who has the NYT deplatformed?

What's your point?

That NYTimes takes a stand against deplatforming? At their own summits? Or in their newspaper's opinion pieces?

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#129

Post by lazide »

treis wrote: post #84
lazide wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Mishandling customer funds yourself against your own stated use of said funds to customers when you gathered those funds is one of those crimes above, depending on specifics. Bad financial controls is if someone else whoopsie accidentally steals or mishandles the funds. Which at least per a cite provided earlier, he admitted to doing it himself. To be able to claim a lack of culpability for this requires a degr…

He doesn't have to claim anything because he's presumed innocent. To nail him for wire fraud you need to prove: >(1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money; >(2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual... Thus far he hasn't admitted to either and so hasn't yet admitte…

You’re making claims I never did.

Wire fraud != fraud, theft, or embezzlement.

It’s a specific sub-type of fraud, and your link is pointing to a specific list of elements within a certain jurisdiction.

Even then, that vox conversation cited above combined with what we already know is likely to be enough to prove at least embezzlement.

Here is a link to some elements of the crime for that if you’re interested.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/embezzlement

Based on what we’ve seen so far, unless he somehow can convince a Judge or Jury that he didn’t know what was happening, it would be very implausible someone couldn’t get a sizable conviction somewhere on one or more of those charges. But we won’t know for sure until the situation has been analyzed. But he sure isn’t helping himself.

Which is why I said what I said. He could of course have no defense and sit there mute for the entire trial, but I can’t imagine a Jury would be all that convinced by it, if the prosecution provided even the most basic set of evidence that seems to be lying around all over the place.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#130

Post by graeme »

VagueMag wrote: post #121
graeme wrote: post #95

I looked into this. They used to do business as Geniome Bank, and their job ads are for "crypto and marijuana". Almost no publicity, though they sponsored a few marijuana events. Chalopin usually shies away from press, so his personal involvement is odd. His son is also the chief digital officer of the company. Another curiosity is the old Farmington team is still there, including the presdient, and they still appear…

It's a very "wow the simulation is running wild" sensation to see that someone who helped create a Keystone Kops-style cartoon I loved as a kid is at the center of all this stuff where the regulators and investigators are seemingly totally out to lunch.

You may enjoy "inspector Tether". The "Fiat Currency --> Crypto Loans" bit was prescient, in light of knowledge that Tether's largest "customer", FTX, was a total fraud. Highly unlikely FTX gave Tether the $36 billion in USD that Tether claimed.

https://twitter.com/caspiancey/status/1348781201146826753

Post reply on HN