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

BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 254 posts

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#221

Post by simias »

ebikelaw wrote: post #176
Fnoord wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google surely must have a copy, as well as Archive.org. These people benefitted from the scam; they should be held accountable as well.

I love these comments because they highlight the ambivalence of the HN commentariat. If google actually had copies of deleted user data, the privacy-minded would lose their heads. And they’d be right because there are all kinds of laws around this. Deleted user data has to be really gone, even from backups, within a finite time.

I'd rather websites did not keep my private data when I delete my account but I have no problem with the archival of public content. Of course with social networks pushing their users to overshare all the time the line can be pretty fuzzy with comment history and things like that but I don't see how anybody could consider archiving a video published on Youtube as a breach of user privacy.

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#222

Post by soundwave106 »

ncallaway wrote: post #169
lsadam0 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps then your definition of 'expert' is incorrect? Would it not be that the ones who saw it coming were really the experts? And those who laughed at them were anything but? I would argue that those who laughed at the doomsayers of 2000 & 2008 are the same as those now arguing that BitCoin can only go up. Your reply is a rather odd justification for self-destructive financial behavior.

> Would it not be that the ones who saw it coming were really the experts? No, because there are people that predict fiscal doom all the time . * People predicted that 2016 would have a huge crash. * People predicted that 2017 would have a huge crash. * People predicted that 2018 would have a huge crash. * People will predict that 2019 would have a huge crash. * People will predict that 2020 would have a huge crash.…

It is impossible for people to predict the future perfectly (this is why diversification in investment is so important). "Don't try to time the market" is also generally considered good advise. It's impossible to know exactly when a crash occurs.

That said, it is possible to use market indicators, historical factors, and other numeric qualifications for reasons to be wary, because the investment asset looks too expensive. For instance, up to the 2008 crash, two important indicators -- the price to income ratio, and the price to rent ratio, were very high, indicating real estate was significantly overvalued. The same thing applied to the sky high prices of many .com stocks in 2000, who really didn't have any profit or even cash flow behind it to back the valuation up.

There were plenty of experts raising warning flags on these bubbles. Even from a broader perspective, The Economist was wary of Internet stocks in 1999 (https://www.economist.com/node/183809) and was wary of the housing bubble that caused the 2008 crash in 2005 (http://www.economist.com/node/4079027).

(Of course, The Economist in 1999 used Amazon as the example of an overvalued stock. Whoops. Shows that you "never know". But they wouldn't have been wrong if they had used, say, pets.com.)

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#223

Post by kenning »

znebby wrote: post #38
dmix wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, what is the background on this? Was this an officially run conference in Asia or America? The choice of hardcore metal and drunk nerdy business/financey people dancing seems like such a bizarre choice. Although I'm not familiar with the typical ra-ra sales (or self-help) events these types of people seem to be from.

It was in Thailand. Haha, I think the metal music was edited. This seems to be the original clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f18bv76QVs

wait, so the unedited video has the star wars theme? that's even more silly

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#224

Post by sseveran »

mannykannot wrote: post #171
saas_co_de wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ponzi scheme work because people believe the fraud That is not always the case. Sometimes you have a Ponzi like Madoff where it may seem legit to investors but most ponzis are blatant and the people involved know it is a ponzi but think they can profit by selling it to greater fools. Of course they will all express shock and feign ignorance when they are trying to get their money back or defend themselves from the…

In the US, as the Madoff case showed, if it can be shown that you are a sophisticated enough investor to realize that it is probably a Ponzi scheme, your profits can be clawed back and used as partial restitution for the victims. Any scheme that is upfront about what it was doing would significantly lower the bar on making that case.

In fact this is the case even if you are not a sophisticated investor, since the profits are not yours and are really just stolen property.

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#225

Post by dudus »

arethuza wrote: post #125
csomar wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't really "print" a $200million. Finex explanation is that when a user requests USDT they issue new USDT from their USD reserves.

You really believe they added $200million to their USD reserves to cover the USDT? Edit: Where would they get that USD?

They say it's their "institutional investors", they never release who these are (some people say it's Bitfinex themselves), they never release what bank they use or which country is the money deposited in.

It's rotten to the core... The consensus is that they either don't have that money at all (most likely scenario) or that if they do it's all dirty money and they are operating a money laundry scheme....

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#226

Post by empath75 »

dom96 wrote: post #154
Pyxl101 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Tether does not guarantee in their terms and conditions that they'll exchange Tether back into equivalent reserve currency makes it _super_ sketchy from my point of view. The only way that Tether should be considered backed by and equivalent to USD (risk-reduced) is if Tether is contractually obligated to convert it back into USD. Instead, this is what their TOS says: > Tethers are not money and are not…

I'm by no means an expert, but I'm wondering why the people responsible behind Tether do this? Why don't they ask people for a dollar for each Tether coin and then store those dollars indefinitely, wouldn't that guarantee that the currency is pegged? They would always be able to exchange the Tether back to a dollar.

They don’t have any access to banking.

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#227

Post by FireBeyond »

unknown_apostle wrote: post #213
Pyxl101 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Tether does not guarantee in their terms and conditions that they'll exchange Tether back into equivalent reserve currency makes it _super_ sketchy from my point of view. The only way that Tether should be considered backed by and equivalent to USD (risk-reduced) is if Tether is contractually obligated to convert it back into USD. Instead, this is what their TOS says: > Tethers are not money and are not…

What is absolutely amazing is that, since your comment (only 24 days ago), they granted 500.000.000 new USD tethers.

And yet they still can't name their bank, unless under NDA...

Nothing fishy there.

And apparently this bank isn't asking questions about the tens of millions of USD pouring into its account every day, supposedly...

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#228

Post by empath75 »

bhouston wrote: post #153
leetbulb wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as reference as the comment here was deleted. Pretty important stuff. http://omnichest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=3MbYQMMmSkC3AgW... https://i.imgur.com/BsPSZKO.png

Basically I think the tether are fraudulent. I do not have proof but they likely are. What is the best way to make money on them? Can one short tether?

Good chance the interest rates will wipe you out before the price crashes.

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#229

Post by empath75 »

andirk wrote: post #118
frakr wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it? https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/tether/#charts

That's what I'm saying. If they are actually able to always trade at very close to USD every day for over a year, does not that show stability in the coin? If it is, in fact, printed money, then it keeps working so far. Just like USD.

Low trading volume on kraken, easy to wash trade to fix the price where you want.

Re: BitConnect Closes Exchange as States Warn of Unregulated Sales

#230

Post by throwaway413 »

metamet wrote: post #197
throwaway413 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah and assuming Warren Buffet et al can literally never be wrong is so much smarter. The world is not black and white.

No, but ponzi schemes and Crypto are on the same spectrum in terms of traditional financial advisement. Only up until very recently did Crypto as a whole break away from it, and BitConnect just happens to have its foot in both.

No they're not - they are separated by the fact that one's sole purpose is to commit fraud, while the other actually has to do - however much - with technical merit. The however much part exists in every other type of market..there is a subset of people that will always try to game the system of any system they exist within. This is nothing new. That subset can vary in size based on qualities of said market, yes, but the intent of the market is not solely to enable those people.

Saying cryptocurrency only recently broke away from this is just a conclusion of your premise, which I disagree with entirely due to the existence of material like Bitcoin's whitepaper. To say they are on the same spectrum is just misleading.

Post reply on HN