Live data from Hacker News

FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

nytimes.com

81–90 of 226 posts

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#81
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am surprised the NYT didn't de-platform him. Actually, I am not surprised the NYT did not de-platform him.

Who has the NYT deplatformed? What platform do they even comtrol?

Getting people kicked off speaking events is a common 'deplatforming' tactic.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#82
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SBF is probably paying for the best personal brand repair money can buy. He knows if you can achieve the cult like following of Elon or Trump you can become untouchable with the right bribes.

SBF's name is the reputational equivalent of Bernie Madoff. You think people are going to help him make a comeback or convince people to give him more money? His only counsel now is going to be criminal lawyers. No PR firm or conference interview could save this dude's reputation.

His PR team bought the New York Times. It's ludicrous to think that they're giving him this positive treatment without bribes. Well, not bribe-bribes, of course, but rather the kind of bribes that very rich and well-connected people can afford.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#83
Interesting how almost no one commented on the actual article here. I think this ownership probably has to more do with the fact that mainstream banks don't want to get near crypto exchanges than some kind of corrupt conspiracy. The current regulatory system relies on outsourcing AML/KYC to banks but I guess no one ever thought about what happens if someone is rich enough to just buy a bank. Plenty of 5 employee credit unions around just waiting to be acquired!

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#84
post #66
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he's admitted to are loose financial controls and by the letter of the law it's not illegal to be bad at your job. Obviously no one really believes his "whoopsie poopsie accidentally lost a few billion" story but technically he hasn't yet admitted to a crime.

Nope. Mishandling customer funds yourself against your own stated use of said funds to customers when you gathered those funds is one of those crimes above, depending on specifics. Bad financial controls is if someone else whoopsie accidentally steals or mishandles the funds. Which at least per a cite provided earlier, he admitted to doing it himself. To be able to claim a lack of culpability for this requires a degr…

He doesn't have to claim anything because he's presumed innocent. To nail him for wire fraud you need to prove:

>(1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money;

>(2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...

Thus far he hasn't admitted to either and so hasn't yet admitted to a crime.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#86
From the article:

“The chairman of FBH is Jean Chalopin, who, along with being a co-creator of cartoon cop Inspector Gadget in the 1980s, is the chairman of Deltec Bank, which, like FTX, is based in the Bahamas. Deltec’s best-known client is Tether, a crypto company with $65 billion in assets offering a stablecoin that is pegged to the dollar.”

That tells you everything you need to know.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#87
post #8

My question is why the NY times is still running a summit where SBF is currently still scheduled to speak.

Why would other people agree to share a stage with a guy who has possibly/probably(?) committed a massive fraud?

There's plenty of journalistic value in interviewing him and the audience will be very interested in hearing it.

I'm not sure what being outraged over his interview is going to achieve Signalling you disagree with what he did? To protect people from his hearing his dangerous words? To punish him?

IMO hearing his rationale, seeing how he convinced people, the lies he tells himself, etc should all be analyzed and publicly scrutinized. It's not like he's promoting some new venture or something.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but personally, I am much more interested in what he has to say now than I was pre-collapse.

Yes, but you also seem to know more about the story than the average person. When SBF lies or gaslights, you can see right through it. Different story for the average listener, who will be listening to most interactions with an open mind and susceptible to whichever person tends to be more charming or persuasive.

I would withhold judgement. For all we know the interviewer (who is going to be much more prepared and informed than people here) is going to press him in front of thousands of people why he stole people's money and lied about it. Let's see.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally view financial theft as a form of violence.

Good for you? The law and society at large doesn't. Violence - behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

I think most understand violence to include things like intimidation, emotional abuse, and imprisonment. The expression "physical violence" is a reflection of this broader understanding - there wouldn't need to be clarification, otherwise.

I think of violence as the use of force or implied force to limit the agency of another. I'm not sure I'd call this violence but I can see where they're coming from.

Maybe ask for clarification instead of being rude and dismissive, or simply leave your sneering judgement unsaid. You may be find this view uninteresting, but I find your snark exhausting. I could just as easily say, "oh you're snarky, good for you?" Additionally GP added to the conversation, and your snark detracts.

Post reply on HN