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

FTX – The fraud was in the code

newsletter.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 101 posts

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#61

Post by bryanrasmussen »

heylook wrote: post #50
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty insane that Sam Bankman-Fried decided to plead not-guilty. Would easily bet that was his decision. He's obviously made insanely stupid choices already, like leaking Caroline Ellison's journal and getting his bail revoked. I'm sure he was counseled against it, but his lawyers were probably like "well, he wants to swing the bat, and we get paid more if it goes to trial anyway."

>> Pretty insane that Sam Bankman-Fried decided to plead not-guilty. >Would easily bet that was his decision. That's a tautology. His decision to plead not-guilty is literally his decision.

it's obvious the parent comment means that he was counseled against it and decided to do it anyway because he's just like that.

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#62

Post by Macha »

vba616 wrote: post #41

"Some have wondered why Wang chose such a seemingly arbitrary number as $65,355,999,994" int((2^16 - 180) * 999999.9999 + 1) = 65,355,999,994

This proposed explanation just moves the abitrariness to "why 180" and "why that amount of 9s"?

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#63

Post by bryanrasmussen »

chubot wrote: post #48
anonzzzies wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems like if you were committing massive fraud, you'd want to avoid leaving permanent records of it on someone else's systems. Yes, I had to give my professional opinion on why some healthcare software here was breached so I asked the company to deliver the source: this software is written from begin 2022. They don’t use any normal (git, cvs, sourcesafe etc) versioning system; just zip files with dates in them.…

Actually yeah, this would allow the Dan Ariely defense. He said he got a spreadsheet from a company, and also insisted he didn't doctor the spreadsheet. But he also admits he was the only person who handled the spreadsheet (presumably to not through his collaborators under the bus). He simply says he doesn't know how to reconcile those facts -- that's "your problem" if you want to prove him guilty. But since there's…

So - what I'm hearing is there is a potentially small but perhaps lucrative market for an onsite git system (because that's what programmers know how to use) that outputs zip files that can then be used as the code archive if Johnny Law comes calling?

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#64

Post by Macha »

rich_sasha wrote: post #56
zinekeller wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python usage != incompetent financial institution. 1) even before the speedups done now on CPython, PyPy has always existed (and NumPy was HW-accelerated) and more importantly 2) It has a native arbitrary-precision decimal type. Even other languages seriously used in financial institutions like OCaml ( https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ocaml-needs-an-arbitrary-precisi... ) doesn't even provide it natively.

OCaml is used by Jane Street but no one else in this space (certainly no major player). Jane Street are a successful and respectable company but no giant, by any standard. If anything, I'd say their fame for using OCaml is greater than their fame as a trading firm. The benchmark would need to be Java or C++, which are the mainstay of the industry.

I actually sort of suspect that the most common reason for people to have heard of Jane Street is their advertising for internships on maths related YouTube channels. (Not the most common reason for their customers or partners, just the greatest number of people)

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#65

Post by anonzzzies »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #63
chubot wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually yeah, this would allow the Dan Ariely defense. He said he got a spreadsheet from a company, and also insisted he didn't doctor the spreadsheet. But he also admits he was the only person who handled the spreadsheet (presumably to not through his collaborators under the bus). He simply says he doesn't know how to reconcile those facts -- that's "your problem" if you want to prove him guilty. But since there's…

So - what I'm hearing is there is a potentially small but perhaps lucrative market for an onsite git system (because that's what programmers know how to use) that outputs zip files that can then be used as the code archive if Johnny Law comes calling?

It's scary how common it is even though you never hear about it on HN. We get so incredibly many 'versioned zips' via wetransfer, no password/encryption of vital company/gov/healthcare/etc systems...

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#66

Post by Crosseye_Jack »

bmitc wrote: post #5

Pretty insane that Sam Bankman-Fried decided to plead not-guilty. And it's interesting that their defense is an implication that a witness is committing perjury for a lighter sentence without any evidence backing it up. And just what in the world were any of these people thinking? Sam Bankman-Fried isn't remotely charismatic, so I just don't understand why people would follow his demands and actively participate in s…

> Pretty insane that Sam Bankman-Fried decided to plead not-guilty.

Prosecution have stated that they haven’t offered SBF a plea deal, so what incentive does he have to make their job any easier?

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#67

Post by ThinkBeat »

A tip: If you intend to commit fraud or other illicit activity dont host / store your code on Microsoft GitHub.

Hmm in fact dont use git at all.

Law enforcement only need to find a single developer pc/laptop/whatever and they will have the entire history, comments, who did it, and code.

Having it all in a centralized system that is configured to be easily nuked is safer, than trying to nuke every laptop/pc/whatever that has a copy.

Of course, the entire code base will probably be available on any laptop/pc/whatever that LE can seize, but it is less data than with git.

I wonder if you could do the development all on ram drives on the development machine, that way if you shut down all the code is gone. Just make damn sure to stow/check in your code before doing so.

I have partially done this myself a several years ago, but that was only to try and speed up compile times.

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#68

Post by BLanen »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #57
lindq181 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone relatively involved in the crypto space the past few years, no one saw FTX as anything to be proud of. It was a centralized exchange, basically a web2 company that handled crypto. Only the TradFi VCs (the Mr. Wonderfuls of the world) spouted rhetoric like that. The engineers building out the chain ecosystems & protocols on top of it never thought much of it other than another place to trade with orderbooks…

Really curious why you'd make this distinction? > web2 company Are web3 companies less fraudulent?

Cryptobros try to pretend because "web3" is blockchain, that the blockchains will reveal anything bad before it can happen.

Completely untrue, of course. There's always a real-world link(because otherwise nobody would be profiting(people want stuff)/nothing would actually happen)

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#69

Post by angio »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #57
lindq181 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone relatively involved in the crypto space the past few years, no one saw FTX as anything to be proud of. It was a centralized exchange, basically a web2 company that handled crypto. Only the TradFi VCs (the Mr. Wonderfuls of the world) spouted rhetoric like that. The engineers building out the chain ecosystems & protocols on top of it never thought much of it other than another place to trade with orderbooks…

Really curious why you'd make this distinction? > web2 company Are web3 companies less fraudulent?

Aave cannot fake its risk parameters because it's fully on chain and anyone can check them.

Crypto scams are always off chain (like FTX and many more) or have smart contracts that can be upgraded by anyone (but again, anyone can check that the contracts can be upgrade and by whom).

Re: FTX – The fraud was in the code

#70

Post by orbz »

bmitc wrote: post #15
jhobag wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sequoia led their one of their rounds, everyone assumed sequoia did enough due diligence, everyone goes in and fills the round; it's assumed its a trustworthy platform for retail

I honestly feel Sequoia should be held partially responsible for funding and marketing such a blatant criminal enterprise. I'm a little tired of these venture capitalists claiming all innonence when they should have a burden of responsibility. They want all the upsides and none of the downsides to throwing millions at people.

They could be held partially responsible as they could have their fund LPs sue them for negligence, especially if they had any materials detailing that they did diligence.

They won’t be though, because everyone would be afraid for future repercussions. That said, they’re on a list of VC firms I would hesitate to take calls from going forward.

Post reply on HN