Deleted - Recent developments proved me wrong.
Go for it.
FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
331–340 of 890 posts
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a Wall Street corruption story. https://twitter.com/wallstreetpro/status/1591167190996504576 Sam, Caroline, and everyone at the top of FTX and Alameda have very close family ties to key power brokers on Wall Street, which is how they were able to run this scam. FTX has also lobbied extensively for harsh regulations on DeFi, which is a key reason that he was hated by people in the cryptocurrency space, and ado…
> This is a Wall Street corruption story. No, stop trying to spin this. It's a stereotypical crypto story. > Sam, Caroline, and everyone at the top of FTX and Alameda have very close family ties to key power brokers on Wall Street, which is how they were able to run this scam. Who was Do Kwon's wall street family tie? > FTX has also lobbied extensively for harsh regulations on DeFi, which is a key reason that he was…
(We should remember to be careful in the thread to stay substantive; dismissing your opponents claims as “Utter bull” may feel good to write, but the sentence after that is the valuable one for readers. Only you can prevent forest fires^W^Wflame wars.)
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's weird is, why wasn't the system turned off? They've totally collapsed, filing bankruptcy, and supposedly aren't allowing withdrawals, so what was the point of leaving the system up and vulnerable?
They don't have the power to pause non-FTT blockchain systems. What you're suggesting isn't really possible. Someone has to hold the keys -- and I doubt they used sufficient multi-sig -- and anyone who has the keys can always move the funds.
But aren't they themselves (FTX) custodians of these funds? In that case, why not turn their services off to protect the keys from being hacked? What you say makes sense once a hack takes place, but how did the hackers get the keys? Or do they use external custodians?
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#334To all the people replying that crypto isn't regulated: that's a myth. Exchanges are regulated and keep KYC info of their customers. If the FTX hack is true, then all that KYC info will be sold in the black market. Regulation didn't prevent the hack (or rug-pull?). Self-custody with DeFi does prevent it. It's shocking how some people are for tinkering hardware/software and self-hosting services like Nextcloud, but it…
Whatever info FTX had, sure. Looks like your private documents were stored with Stripe, a much better steward of your data: > FTX partners with Stripe to ensure a secure identity verification process. Please note data will be stored and may be used according to the Stripe and FTX privacy policies. https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360027668192-Individu...
I wouldn't be surprised if FTX has a copy of all documents and PII. I don't think regulators would accept "Stripe suddenly went under" as a valid excuse for not having KYC data.
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a Wall Street corruption story. https://twitter.com/wallstreetpro/status/1591167190996504576 Sam, Caroline, and everyone at the top of FTX and Alameda have very close family ties to key power brokers on Wall Street, which is how they were able to run this scam. FTX has also lobbied extensively for harsh regulations on DeFi, which is a key reason that he was hated by people in the cryptocurrency space, and ado…
Very interesting take. How would another investment fund transfer customer funds to Alameda while being able to sweep it under the rug? I think the transfer wasn’t the problem. It was illegal, yes. But the empire fell because Alameda lost the money. Alameda’s CEO: “I use very little math. Being comfortable with risk is important. We tend not to have things like stop losses.” https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRxWbctK/
From what I've gathered, Alameda lost the money during the Luna collapse back in the spring. Sam extended a loan from FTX (using customer funds) to Alameda (which he owned 90% of) to prevent Alameda from collapsing with everything else (Three Arrows Capital etc). When called out, he claimed on Twitter that he was just shuffling around some cold wallets. The balance sheet leak from last week handed observers a smoking gun showing that it was actually being loaned out to Alameda, triggering Binance to begin their exit, which kicked off the cascade of events.
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
If he is in fact on the run... Does this dude really think the CIA and FBI won't find him? He's likely not safe anywhere but Russia, China, North Korea or Israel.... maybe Pakistan.
Why Israel? I’d assume they’d hand him over given their close background no?
Sometimes yes, but historically in general they haven't extradited their citizens for financial crimes against foreigners. I believe it changed a few years ago, at least on paper?
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lumping diagonally opposed things (centralized coins like FTT or decentralized coins like BTC) under the same category (crypto) is quite misleading. > How long do we have to wait to see crypto working? BTC (on chain) is still working as intended, after all these years.
> Lumping diagonally opposed things (centralized coins like FTT or decentralized coins like BTC) under the same category (crypto) is quite misleading. Crypto generally means digital currency, does it not? I think leaving them out would be actually misleading. > BTC (on chain) is still working as intended, after all these years. Working in what sense?
> Working in what sense?
That you can securely and cheaply transact value without a third party being involved?
That governments can’t directly block your account the way Trudeau blocked protestors bank accounts?
Probably a few other ways as well ...
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ponzi schemes by definition use opaque ledgers. Ponzi schemes are custodial. Ponzi schemes guarantee returns. There exist Ponzi schemes which have disguised themselves as cryptocurrencies, but the idea that all cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes demonstrates a complete ignorance of what a Ponzi scheme is.
> Ponzi schemes by definition use opaque ledgers. Why? To me a ponzi scheme is where the earlier "investors" get paid out with the money of later "investors". That's it. By that definition it's quite the "decentralized", somewhat stochastic ponzi.
Ponzi victims are told on paper that their "investments" are increasing in value, and that they can withdraw at any time, when in reality, the assets don't actually exist. Also a key aspect is that their balance only ever goes up.
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck getting your money through the legal system when the bank collapsed!
FDIC. Everyone else pays for your shitty banking choices via inflation instead. To me the crypto version is better TBH, which would force either private insurance or none at all. Believe it or not you can buy private insurance for crypto, which would achieve something like FDIC.
FDIC rescuing a bank doesn’t involve money printing. Since the bank still closes and can’t offer new loans, it’s slightly deflationary.
Re: FTX faces potential hack, sees mysterious outflows totaling more than $600M
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a crypto failure. Crypto works. This is a human failure. FTX didn't collapse because of the technology. It collapsed because of human error. The fix is rather simple. If an organization looks like a bank and quacks like a bank; it should be regulated like a bank.
> This isn't a crypto failure. Crypto works. This is a human failure. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
A point no one who wants to ban guns would disagree with.