181–190 of 446 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
just because it's available doesn't mean it's trivial to figure out. it does actually take effort to find something like this.
That specific thing is kind of trivial to check though. Download the full chain, check which addresses has exactly the same list of tokens as the list was published by Coinbase, check which ones received the tokens shortly before it was announced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's in the release, > U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said: “Today’s charges are a further reminder that Web3 is not a law-free zone. Just last month, I announced the first ever insider trading case involving NFTs, and today I announce the first ever insider trading case involving cryptocurrency markets. Our message with these charges is clear: fraud is fraud is fraud, whether it occurs on the blockchain or on Wall St…
> Why do you say insider trading is legal for non-securities? What, exactly, prohibits you from doing that? Certainly not the Securities Act of 1933 or any SEC rule. Overall maybe this is a complicated way of officially calling them securities and cleaning this mess on a higher level. At least that's what the FBI implies. However, it is not up to the FBI to decide what is a security, but rather up to the courts of la…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people suspect there's ""official"" insider trading at the exchanges; there's no reason for the exchange not to front-run orders or fake the order book if they think they can get away with it. Or trade against heavily leveraged positions to liquidate them. Or prop-trade with the customers' money.
It’s legal for the company to do it. Not legal for individuals. Coinbase could have bought assets ahead of time and done the same thing legally. There was a case where a person had access to the credit card transaction data[1] and used that data to figure out sales prior to earning calls. That same data is available to hedgefunds willing to purchase it from Bloomberg. They call legally get a companies sales data prio…
i.e. by definition bloomberg buying the data and making it available to the terminal is making the data public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might be thinking of Charlie Lee? Charlie Lee joined Coinbase, wash traded Litecoin [1] to give the appearance of wider interest and volume in order to get Litecoin listed on Coinbase, and promptly dumped all his bags at the peak. [1] https://i.redd.it/u9vhbxvr63t71.jpg
Let's admit the true problem of crypto is allowing sociopathic nerds to act as if they will not face consequences.
It talks volumes about the internal controls at CB that it took a tweet to expose this. Given the speed with which they grew last two years I expect their financial and security processes to be next to nothing. This is just tip of an iceberg. Insiders would have made tens of millions over last two years of bull run, if not more. This dude just got greedy and unlucky to get caught just as the crypto bubble began burst…
What could they do though? Ask all employees to provide their personal wallet addresses then monitor that? Seems unlikely to happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a value judgement. If you find crypto to be unfair, there's a very simple solution that doesn't require bringing in guys with guns to deal out punishment. You can simply just not participate. In an ideal world we could get rid of insider trading, but selectively punishing people just makes the problem worse and with so much of congress dominating the market I think it's quite clear the punishment is selective…
> This is a value judgement. If you find crypto to be unfair, there's a very simple solution that doesn't require bringing in guys with guns to deal out punishment. You can simply just not participate. Ok. And I assume the welfare bills of crypto scam victims will be paid directly by crypto companies? What about hospital bills from attempted suicides? If you want crypto to be its own special island, fine, but you hav…
cost benefit analysis seems rather simple to me. You either pretend you can govern money into a better place using vast amounts of precious resources, such as time and political capital of our central planners, or you celebrate that no one has reasonable expectations that crypto is a safe market and allow it to continue to be an unsafe market which will either die or sort itself out with market pressures.
We're not talking about necessary resources like food land or shelter here. Crypto can live or die by its own merits and to pretend governing into the remarkably unfair landscape that is modern finance is worth the resources necessary, seems to me, to be easily dismissed as anything approaching reasonable.
Crypto will very likely continue to get more governance, but that's not good or unexpected. It's just centralized power doing what centralized power does, which is expand its power and reach.
Note that they were charged for wire fraud and wire fraud conspiracy. So not for actual Section 10(b) violations, aka insider trading.
This may sound like a dumb question, but as a foreigner, I have no idea what wire fraud actually means, but I hear it pretty often. The explanation I found “Mail fraud and wire fraud are terms used to describe the use of a physical or electronic mail system to defraud another” doesn’t really help me further, other than it just being “fraud”. What would be the difference between insider trading and fraud, in this spec…
The problem with that is state laws and capabilities are inconsistent. Even in New York, where there is a well established body of law for things like financial frauds, the local prosecutors make lack capability or venue. If you live in Lake Placid, NY and are scammed, it’s unlikely that the Essex County DA (probably 4 attorneys) has the capability to prosecute a complex financial crime. If you live in Manhattan, different story - that DA has thousands of attorneys and expertise.
The Federal government side-steps turf issues and inequity by using more “umbrella” laws that are easy to approve. If you commit a fraud that has a connection to the mail, “Mail Fraud”. If you use a phone, “Wire Fraud”. If you take money that isn’t yours from an FDIC insured bank, that’s a Federal crime. If you lie to a Federal agent, that’s a crime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Asking for a friend? Or did you mean antagonist?
The protagonist is the main/leading character in a story. It's not a moral judgement except in the sense that stories usually make the protagonist the good guy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you say that? In my experience, centralized exchanges are perceived as public enemy #1 by a lot of crypto people. They are seen as a necessary (but temporary) evil to bridge the "legacy" fiat world.
> They are seen as a necessary (but temporary) evil to bridge the "legacy" fiat world. There is no world in which they can put that genie back in the bottle, so I really hope they don’t actually believe it’s “temporary.”
https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3-dominance
So there is a world where centralized exchanges have far less relevance than they do today.