401–410 of 886 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
She is also VERY well connected to the SEC. It wouldn't surprise me if they gave her a sweetheart deal.
Bernie Madoff sat on SEC advisory committees and was the onetime chairman of Nasdaq.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What did Binance do wrong again? I don’t consider having faulty blockchain analysis software at a time (2018) when most blockchain analysis software wasn’t very good a crime. And the Iranians they supposedly aided all used VPNs and hid the fact that they were Iranian. I think the best the government will get out of Binance is a DPA but that’s just me.
They haven't been caught red-handed, but their reserve claims are highly suspect[1]. Predictions that Binance is next are pretty credible in my mind, and the DOJ is already looking[2] in that direction. [1] https://mishtalk.com/economics/binances-alleged-crypto-audit... [2] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/12/doj-divided-over...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine thinking people actually want self-custody. Look around, people want centralization. The fringes who constantly parrot “not your wallet, not your coins” will forever be in the minority as mom and pop don’t trust themselves to any kind of cold storage. Crypto-obsessed will forever live in this fantasy world.
Okay. People have successfully avoided fraud, theft, and the tyrannical seizure of their assets by arbitrary decisions of arbitrary government officials. Billions of dollars worth of assets are stored on blockchains. Unless you have a mathematical argument against the properties of a blockchain, I will continue to believe the properties are true.
There is no mathematical proof that they will be worth billions of dollars tomorrow. I mean, I would wager if the original Satoshi wallets wake up and start selling Bitcoin this time tomorrow the total market cap can be counted in millions.
Sure, maybe mathematically there will never be more than X tokens, but no one cares about that. Everyone at the end of the day cares about what they can trade one token for. Otherwise, it's worth less than monopoly money or Chuck-E-Cheese tokens.
Alright, well, now that that's done - let's go find all those people in the past threads who were saying things like SBF will never be arrested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He commingled bank accounts for two separate companies. It didn’t all go to him buying Lamborghinis
He didn't commingle accounts. He stole from customers to keep Alameda afloat. This is why the money never got converted into actual crypto, and why there are no assets: the money got used, by Alameda, in what must have been some truly cataclysmic trading. It also sounds like alameda's job was to market make the FTX coin, which they presumably did with that money in part. And likely kept doing until they blew up. He's…
Everything he's done since FTX first crashed has pretty much been straight out of the most fantastical dream any federal prosecutor has woken up from in the middle of the night, certain that no defendant on the planet would actually be that dumb.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> anyone else think it makes congress appear weak to still be allowing people to remotely testify? Not really. Not being compelled to testify against yourself is also one of the most important rights this country has enshrined.
> Not really. Not being compelled to testify against yourself is also one of the most important rights this country has enshrined. Congress isn't a court, and he was not testifying because congress arrested him or anything - it doesn't work that way. He was going to testify - and a lot of people testify in front of congress all the time. But you used to have to do it in person until the pandemic. Now that congress is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A necessary conceit of the prisoner's dilemma is that they can't communicate, and therefore can't strategize together so that doesn't exactly apply here. It's just self preservation.
Prisoner's dilemma has a Nash equilibrium where defection is the best move regardless of anything else that happens. If you change the game to be a repetitive 'prisoner's dilemma' with the same actors the best strategy would be tit for tat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is a much bigger "prize" for the prosecution. She had low profile and not all that well known to the electorate. Plus, prosecuting her may not even look all that good, for identity politics reasons. If she cooperated first, there is a good chance of immunity or very low sentence.
> Plus, prosecuting her may not even look all that good, for identity politics reasons. Strongly disagree with this. Look at how they threw the book at Elizabeth Holmes (vs, say, Adam Neumann, or any other male founder from the last decade plus). If anything women have been getting it harder.
Inevitable, but a lot of talking heads used the delay after FTX's collapse to sow doubt about corruption, media failure, etc. Feds were probably gathering evidence from Day 1, and the restructuring CEO seems to have found it: https://docs.house.gov/meetings/BA/BA00/20221213/115246/HHRG...
FWIW, most of the presige media (NYTimes, WaPo, WSJ) have been running puff pieces which parrot SBF's claims of ignorance without much if any fact checking or investigation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine thinking people actually want self-custody. Look around, people want centralization. The fringes who constantly parrot “not your wallet, not your coins” will forever be in the minority as mom and pop don’t trust themselves to any kind of cold storage. Crypto-obsessed will forever live in this fantasy world.
Okay. People have successfully avoided fraud, theft, and the tyrannical seizure of their assets by arbitrary decisions of arbitrary government officials. Billions of dollars worth of assets are stored on blockchains. Unless you have a mathematical argument against the properties of a blockchain, I will continue to believe the properties are true.
Nah. As FTT and FTX shows, the marketcap for blockchain tokens means nothing.