Live data from Hacker News

SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

bloomberg.com

441–450 of 489 posts

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be legal for anyone to do what they want with their own money. If they want to throw it off a cliff that’s fine too. What someone else chooses to risk is none of your business.

So the following should be always legal: - Use money to buy guns. - Use money to buy drugs. - Use money to buy assassinations. - Use money to buy bombs.

Yes to the first two. Assassinations and bombings don’t fall under “consenting individuals”.

But if you are logically consistent, then if you support encrypted messaging you believe it should be legal to plan assassinations.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#442
post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of my comment is about a political issue in financial systems. I don't specially care if the replacement is crypto or whatever other decentralized or centralized technologies move things forward.

Then why make that comment on an article about a crypto company in hot water?

Did you read my other comments? Could you be more explicit about your question?

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#443

The same thing will happen to Coinbase. Just look at the backgrounds of their CXOs. None are qualified to be leading such a large company IMO. I bet my life the same shit is going on over there.

Coinbase is a public company and has genuine audits - I'd be surprised if they failed for any reason other than Crypto being outlawed.

Things like this seem "unlikely until they actually happen", then hindsight is 20/20. Enron was a public company with genuine audits, and many people were surprised it was a giant pump and dump scam.

Enron (2001): Enron Corporation, an energy company based in Houston, Texas, infamously collapsed in 2001 due to one of the most notorious cases of corporate fraud in history. Through complex accounting maneuvers and deceptive practices, Enron misrepresented its financial health, hiding debt and inflating profits.

WorldCom (2002): WorldCom was a telecommunications company that engaged in accounting fraud, inflating its assets by over $11 billion. The fraud involved improperly classifying expenses as capital investments, misleading investors and lenders. The scandal led to WorldCom filing for bankruptcy, and several executives were convicted, including CEO Bernard Ebbers.

Tyco International (2002): Tyco International, a multinational manufacturing company, was involved in a series of accounting frauds. The company's CEO, Dennis Kozlowski, and CFO, Mark Swartz, were found guilty of embezzling millions of dollars through unauthorized compensation and unauthorized stock sales. They used various fraudulent methods to conceal their activities.

HealthSouth (2003): HealthSouth, a provider of outpatient surgery, diagnostic imaging, and rehabilitation services, was involved in a massive accounting scandal. The CEO, Richard Scrushy, orchestrated a scheme to overstate the company's earnings by nearly $3 billion, inflating assets and revenues. Scrushy was eventually convicted of bribery, mail fraud, and other charges.

Lehman Brothers (2008): Lehman Brothers, a global financial services firm, played a significant role in the 2008 financial crisis. The company employed accounting practices known as "Repo 105," which involved temporarily moving assets off-balance sheet to hide its financial situation. This misleading presentation contributed to investors' false perception of Lehman Brothers' stability before its collapse.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#444

The same thing will happen to Coinbase. Just look at the backgrounds of their CXOs. None are qualified to be leading such a large company IMO. I bet my life the same shit is going on over there.

I doubt it would happen with coinbase considering they are a public company in US.

When have publicly-traded companies ever done anything wrong?

Enron (2001): Enron Corporation, an energy company based in Houston, Texas, infamously collapsed in 2001 due to one of the most notorious cases of corporate fraud in history. Through complex accounting maneuvers and deceptive practices, Enron misrepresented its financial health, hiding debt and inflating profits.

WorldCom (2002): WorldCom was a telecommunications company that engaged in accounting fraud, inflating its assets by over $11 billion. The fraud involved improperly classifying expenses as capital investments, misleading investors and lenders. The scandal led to WorldCom filing for bankruptcy, and several executives were convicted, including CEO Bernard Ebbers.

Tyco International (2002): Tyco International, a multinational manufacturing company, was involved in a series of accounting frauds. The company's CEO, Dennis Kozlowski, and CFO, Mark Swartz, were found guilty of embezzling millions of dollars through unauthorized compensation and unauthorized stock sales. They used various fraudulent methods to conceal their activities.

HealthSouth (2003): HealthSouth, a provider of outpatient surgery, diagnostic imaging, and rehabilitation services, was involved in a massive accounting scandal. The CEO, Richard Scrushy, orchestrated a scheme to overstate the company's earnings by nearly $3 billion, inflating assets and revenues. Scrushy was eventually convicted of bribery, mail fraud, and other charges.

Lehman Brothers (2008): Lehman Brothers, a global financial services firm, played a significant role in the 2008 financial crisis. The company employed accounting practices known as "Repo 105," which involved temporarily moving assets off-balance sheet to hide its financial situation. This misleading presentation contributed to investors' false perception of Lehman Brothers' stability before its collapse.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has genuine audits Trouble with auditors is that they're paid for by the company. You try hard not to bite the hand that feeds you.

Sure, but as a public company they're legally responsible for the audit they signed off and while the Big 4 refuse to work with private crypto companies, Deloitte did choose to audit Coinbase. I just don't believe they can get away with this level of shady stuff while a Big 4 audit them and they're under extreme scrutiny for the sector from the SEC.

Before it was the "Big Four" it was the "Big Five". Look into what happened to that fifth one... (Arthur Andersen re:Enron)

It's worth noting that while we got the Sarbanes-Oxley Act out of it, it was more or less replaced by Dodd-Frank Act, which was partially repealed by Trump in 2018.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My theory is that Binance execs were having these chats in an encrypted medium (e.g. WA or Signal) but didn't secure themselves against a defector. I think someone on the inside took screenshots and went to the feds (or started cooperating under legal pressure). There's even a leading candidate [0]. What's funny about this is it's a fine metaphor for what ails crypto as a whole. The technology is cryptographically se…

> but didn't secure themselves against a defector Still a surprisingly amateur move. Once worked for the Federal Government where literally everything you write is potentially subject to a FOIA request. The message all new hires were told was, very clearly: "Never put anything into writing you wouldn't be happy to be see published on the front page of the Washington Post" Anything that was even vaguely close to faili…

> And this was for an org that was doing nothing sneaky or underhanded in the slightest

If public scrutiny is such an issue, it is absolutely doing sneaky and underhanded things. Perhaps you have not seen them, that could be true.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#447
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domestic wire transfers in US takes longer and are more expensive than in Europe and developing countries such as Brazil and Argentina Do you think the US is incapable of sending an immediate message transferring money? Of course the US has that technical capability. AML, BSA, KYC, Anti-Fraud. These are a few of the things that slow down the transfers and add to the cost. A lot of people think they're a feature, not…

> AML, BSA, KYC, Anti-Fraud. These are a few of the things that slow down the transfers and add to the cost. A lot of people think they're a feature, not a bug. This is why you have to harden system at the fringes, not in the middle as old clearing systems did.

Ideally, but now you're trusting the edge. It can be done. It's also a lot harder, and requires a lot more investment in places that were not considered things to care about when those old systems were created.

Some things have improved over time, turns out.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The message all new hires were told was, very clearly: "Never put anything into writing you wouldn't be happy to be see published on the front page of the Washington Post" > And this was for an org that was doing nothing sneaky or underhanded in the slightest I disagree. That culture is one of routinely doing sneaky and underhanded things. If it wasn’t, the rule would be “don’t do anything you wouldn't be happy to…

Hard disagree- the appearance of wrongdoing can be nearly as harmful for the accused and cause as much trouble as actual wrongdoing. Both should be avoided.

You seem to be providing a reason (CYA) for being sneaky and underhanded, not arguing against it being sneaky and underhanded.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#449
post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The message all new hires were told was, very clearly: "Never put anything into writing you wouldn't be happy to be see published on the front page of the Washington Post" > And this was for an org that was doing nothing sneaky or underhanded in the slightest I disagree. That culture is one of routinely doing sneaky and underhanded things. If it wasn’t, the rule would be “don’t do anything you wouldn't be happy to…

> If you are actively preventing evidence of your actions from being created, that is itself evidence of consciousness of wrongdoing. Government people are humans too, not just nameless bureaucrats. Imagine working somewhere that you would never be able to make a joke, speculate on a topic, ask a question, because it could be taken out of context due to everything being documented/written down. It is fine to desire t…

> Government people are humans too

Yeah, I’ve worked in government for more than twenty years.

> Imagine working somewhere that you would never be able to make a joke, speculate on a topic, ask a question, because it could be taken out of context due to everything being documented/written down.

Everything being written down makes things being taken out of contexr less of a risk. People with the attitude “don’t write things down if you don’t want to see it in the Washington Post” are, in my experience, without exception concerned primarily about things that would be problematic taken in context.

> It is fine to desire that, but realize that there needs to be a significant pay increase and/or a significant realignment of expectations, since nobody would want to independently take responsibility or action on anything

The attitude at issue is one of avoiding, not taking responsibility. People with it are the people who refuse to take responsibility even if they enjoy exercising authority.

But, yes, you need to pay people in government significantly more, no argument there.

Re: SEC Sues Binance and CEO Zhao for Breaking US Securities Rules

#450
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a ton of context that could work. Anything where it's framed as either (a) untrue or (b) temporary and about to be mitigated. "What we are being falsely accused of is: 'we are operating...'" "We are operating... To fix this we must xyz" But I consider the second one to make the most sense. Saying "we have a problem" is a common first step of fixing it. Saying "we will be committing a felony if I don't win thi…

those are both admissions, with (a) being an admission against interest. they could try and say that it was untrue or temporary (the latter being an admission of guilt, so not a smart move) but that'd be for a jury to determine, most likely. you can't just go to court and disavow all statements you've made as being ironic or untrue, facially, as a means of end-running the claims against you. you have to litigate your…

They aren't both admissions. (a) is saying the context of the statement makes it clear they were saying it was untrue at the time. This happens all the time in, for instance, libel cases, where your attorney will have to submit court papers that include the words, in order, something like "freejazz kills puppies". Obviously, the rest of the sentence or paragraph makes it clear they were quoting someone.

You're right they cannot ex post facto just be like "we were joking". They would be "you're talking the quotes out of context".

And (b) can be future looking. But "temporary and mitigated" is probably a great way to go into these hearings. Maybe not according to the letter of the law, but in general it tends to work out well for the people involved. Since most agencies issue punishments to influence future behavior.

Post reply on HN