Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed • Hacker News Board

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#181

Post by gonehome » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 2:52 PM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #70

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve been waiting years for people to suffer? Lookup “ schadenfreude”.

There are lots of dumb HN comments on any cryptocurrency related topic. Most of them don't know what they're talking about. It's one of the topics where engagement here isn't worthwhile imo. The FTX story is interesting though - mostly reads like an execution by CZ: https://twitter.com/jonwu_/status/1590099676744646656?s=46&t... The main technical innovation of cryptocurrency is the capability to self-custody funds.…

He’s responded in a thread: https://twitter.com/sbf_ftx/status/1590709197502812160?s=46&...

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#182

Post by dghlsakjg » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 3:16 PM UTC

wruza wrote: post #169

dghlsakjg wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do crimes you shouldn’t take notes on it. Let alone record it in a public traceable ledger that the authorities actively track.

But why do you think so? They track it, so what exactly? Last time I’ve seen a ransomware it demanded ETH, not something else. Edit: not bitcoin, eth actually, but it makes no difference here

Because the ledger is pseudonymous. Meaning that if they can connect your real identity with your wallet address at any point, then your entire transaction history is revealed.

In your ransomware example, it means that if you ever used that wallet for anything in the past or future that can be connected to you then they now have a pretty good proof that you committed a serious crime. And everyone who transacts with that wallet now can be questioned if their identity is connected with their wallet

It would be like if you took someone hostage and asked for marked bills with the serial numbers recorded. And also providing the cops with a list of all the other times you might have committed a kidnapping.

Most criminal enterprises deal with cash because because it acts nothing like bitcoin. No transaction history, no nothing

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#183

Post by adam_arthur » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 3:54 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #173

adam_arthur wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Index funds are only as good as their constituents. Why buy index funds that hold many overvalued companies, like Chipotle at 50x PE (2% yield), or Costco at 40x (2.5% yield) when 10y at 4%. To name just a few of many Also certain sectors and companies will do better than others in this macro environment. Would rather buy things that are fairly valued. But to each their own

I believe in a weak form of the efficient market hypothesis that says by the time I have heard of any news, Goldman Sachs and the hedge funds will have already traded on them. Since hedge funds are allowed to short, that includes any estimates I could make about things being overvalued. All the news are priced in by the time they reach me. > Also certain sectors and companies will do better than others in this macro…

Well you haven’t been investing very long if you believe the banks have any idea what’s going on.

They pretty much all had 5000 price targets on the S&P for 2022

Buy recommendations on stocks with wild overvaluation that later collapsed 90%. Just look what most banks and funds were doing during the dotcom bubble

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#184

Post by wruza » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 4:40 PM UTC

dghlsakjg wrote: post #182

wruza wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why do you think so? They track it, so what exactly? Last time I’ve seen a ransomware it demanded ETH, not something else. Edit: not bitcoin, eth actually, but it makes no difference here

Because the ledger is pseudonymous. Meaning that if they can connect your real identity with your wallet address at any point, then your entire transaction history is revealed. In your ransomware example, it means that if you ever used that wallet for anything in the past or future that can be connected to you then they now have a pretty good proof that you committed a serious crime. And everyone who transacts with t…

Criminal organizations must be seeking same optimal risk/fee balance as any other. Cons of cash is, it is hard to move around. Some may use cash only, some a proportion of both, what makes you so sure? You can imagine two bitcoin wallets cash/date-gapped in some low-control country for a meaningful fee and now you have at least a grey wallet instead of black one. Do you think that FBI agents sit at every crypto exchange and watch who does what? Or is there something that prevents from incrementally laundering the money this way?

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#185

Post by edanm » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 7:08 PM UTC

JonahSussman wrote: post #45

woodruffw wrote: post #36

This is maybe tangential of me to say, but since this post is coming from an EA forum: I think the cozy relationship between EA and FTX has done immense damage to the public image and standing of the EA movement. I've never been an EA person (much less a utilitarian) but I can appreciate the meat and potatoes of applied ethics, especially when those ethics are applied consistently . The infusion of cryptocurrency fun…

I'm a bit behind on the times, but I'm failing to see how the philosophy of effective altruism and cryptocurrency are related. Do you know how the two got intertwined?

As someone kind of on the outside of all these movements, I think this is mostly a "founder effects" thing.

A lot of the initial people in EA came from the world of rationality. Classic LessWrong had 3 main topics that were actively discussed - AI risk, Rationality, and EA. It also happened that cryptocurrency became known and somewhat popular among some LessWrong visitors.

We're probably talking like 1% of LessWrong visitors, mind you - but a few of those became crypto-millionaires.

So that's why a bunch of people, who were interested in both AI risk and EA, and now have millions, are infusing the EA movement with cash. Or at least, that's the story as I understand it.

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#186

Post by etcet » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 7:38 PM UTC

woodruffw wrote: post #123

hither_shores wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consequently, we should divert money away from the welfare of people living today and towards efforts that maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets. If that sounds ridiculous, it's because it is. It sounds ridiculous to you because you framed it in an uncharitable way. Another way of saying "maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets", so far as contemporary people ar…

> Even a marginal reduction in the risk of nuclear war, for instance, would be a very good thing. Nobody disagrees with this. But since you brought it up, I think it's worth asking: what precisely has the EA movement done to reduce, even marginally, the risk of a nuclear war?

I believe the general consensus is that nuclear war is a great risk and important to prevent but the effectiveness of philanthropic efforts is low. Fighting malaria is still a more effective form of altruism.

https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/cause-areas/long-term-future...

https://80000hours.org/problem-profiles/nuclear-security/

https://www.effectivealtruism.org/articles/carl-robichaud-fa...

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#187

Post by sacrosancty » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 8:52 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #98

sacrosancty wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was ridiculed for advising people to keep their coins in their own wallet. You were probably ridiculed for saying crypto is a ponzi. But Bitcoin's and Ethereum's prices are consistently higher now than they were 2 years ago. What's the bad outcome you've been warning about that actually happens?

> Bitcoin's and Ethereum's prices are consistently higher now than they were 2 years ago Which is something that will be true until it's not. Bitcoin dropped around 25% in the last week (though is rebounding a bit this morning). It only needs to drop around 33% from the current price to break your 2 year thing. Anything is possible here (in any direction), because it's an insane market propped up by all sorts of shad…

No post body was provided.

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#188

Post by sacrosancty » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 9:07 PM UTC

inquirer39243 wrote: post #115

sacrosancty wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was ridiculed for advising people to keep their coins in their own wallet. You were probably ridiculed for saying crypto is a ponzi. But Bitcoin's and Ethereum's prices are consistently higher now than they were 2 years ago. What's the bad outcome you've been warning about that actually happens?

not op but - I do not think crypto itself is a ponzi - I think long term it has uses, but not this stupid "get rich quick" bs. But I was laughed at for saying "don't buy crypto to make money". NFTs can genuinely be useful - but if you're using them with the goal of making money then you're using them wrong. This stupid art stuff and other general stupid "get rich schemes" have obfuscated it's actual usefulness, leavi…

No post body was provided.

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#189

Post by digianarchist » Fri, Nov 11, 2022, 1:46 AM UTC

digianarchist wrote: post #106

peyton wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTX’s exchange business is regulated by the Securities Commission of the Bahamas.

They haven't even published anything on the FTX debacle: https://www.scb.gov.bs/news/

Looks like they've stepped up.

> FTX assets frozen by Bahamas regulator as crypto exchange fights to survive

https://www.ft.com/content/c6658ce8-26a3-4580-9e64-6083a7d35...

Re: Ftx.com Has Probably Collapsed

#190

Post by ETH_start » Fri, Nov 11, 2022, 1:46 AM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #172

ETH_start wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In principle, a greater number of future lives matter more than a lesser number of present lives. The principle itself seems sound to me. The problem is you can't actually be certain those future lives will come to exist. One assuming they will, and being so confident in their assumption that they deprioritize the lives of the currently living based on it, is hubris, but only because it over-estimates one's powers of…

If we agree the principle can't be applied - why would we consider it sound? That's like saying the principle behind 1 + 1 = 3 is sound, with the small caveat that you get the wrong answers. If something looks good on paper and turns sour when we try to use it, that's the indication that we've miscalculated. Another perspective to consider; the best way to help people in the future is to help people today. Solving th…

A principle can be sound while not being applicable. Principles and applications are two separate things and there's no reason to conflate them.

>>That's like saying the principle behind 1 + 1 = 3

That's not sound in principle..

>>Another perspective to consider; the best way to help people in the future is to help people today.

That is an entirely valid, and I would argue probably correct, perspective yet it doesn't invalidate the principle that a greater number of future lives matter more than a fewer number of current lives. It may be that the best course of action for both future lives and current lives is to pursue the best interest of the currently living.