Jump to content

Cryptocurrencies


rkbabang

Recommended Posts

On 10/10/2023 at 4:10 PM, rkbabang said:

New Fidelity report on Bitcoin.  Pretty basic bitcoin-maximalist arguments, but since I've basically become a Bitcoin-maximalist myself (even though I still hold a significant amount of other crypto assets) I agree with them.

 

1012662.3.0 Bitcoin First Revisited_Final.pdf 1.96 MB · 16 downloads

 

Differentiation between bitcoin and everything else seems to be a key theme of the paper, and an important one. It is difficult to even have a conversation about bitcoin when the first words out of someone's mouth are "crypto is just a scam" knowing they are correct when referring to the recent drama with incidents like FTX, 3AC, and general snake oil sales mentality of 99% of the market. I also feel like "crypto" is just a scam, but bitcoin is a completely separate animal and one that deserves close attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the current crisis and the innocent individuals caught between the war on both sides…For the ones who likely have to flee Gaza, how many do you think are going to their bank? Likely none. How many are taking physical wealth with them? Probably very few. Now think what you could take with your 12-24 word pass phrase committed to memory. 
 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Fly said:

 

Differentiation between bitcoin and everything else seems to be a key theme of the paper, and an important one. It is difficult to even have a conversation about bitcoin when the first words out of someone's mouth are "crypto is just a scam" knowing they are correct when referring to the recent drama with incidents like FTX, 3AC, and general snake oil sales mentality of 99% of the market. I also feel like "crypto" is just a scam, but bitcoin is a completely separate animal and one that deserves close attention.

 

I too think Bitcoin is different from all of the others.  My thinking is that Bitcoin is money.  It is the most secure and decentralized computer network ever created by a long long way, and it isn't even close.   It will eventually be the base layer of value for all of humanity.  It will be the measure by which anything and everything of value will be compared.   I'm not saying that every transaction will be on chain, it won't, but every price will be in Bitcoin (or more likely sats or satashis).  When you get paid it will be in sats, when you buy a stock on any market it will be in sats, when you sell something you will price it in sats.   

 

I don't necessarily think of other crypto as scams, although many probably are.   None of them are or will ever be as secure and decentralized as Bitcoin, which means they are not money, they are something else.  They are more like securities in un-regulated start-ups for which you have no good information and are completely trusting the founders.    For every outright scam there are probably 50 that are not scams, but will fail.  There are also probably some gems hidden in there as investments, but it is difficult to sift through right now.

Ethereum for example isn't a scam, it could possibly someday have extremely valuable use-cases (or not).  It is certainly interesting from a technical point of view, but it is an entirely different animal from Bitcoin.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2023 at 6:56 PM, rkbabang said:


I too think Bitcoin is different from all of the others.  My thinking is that Bitcoin is money.  It is the most secure and decentralized computer network ever created

 

 

I think this is way under appreciated, particularly by those who view all crypto as a scam. The importance of a neutral money free from the baggage of being tied to a sovereign nation is enormous.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Criminals never learn the lack of anonymity problem with crypto, which I think is both good for crypto and society. If I started my own "hit man" web site that required crypto deposits for hits, and just turned in everyone who made a deposit, am I doing a good thing, or a great thing?

 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga/pr/doctor-pleads-guilty-dark-web-murder-hire-plot

 

On April 18, 2022, while in the Northern District of Georgia, Wan accessed a dark web marketplace from his cellular telephone and submitted an order to have a hitman murder his girlfriend. The order included the victim’s name, address, Facebook account, license plate, and car description. In the order, Wan stated: “Can take wallet phone and car. Shoot and go. Or take car.” Wan then electronically transferred a 50% downpayment of approximately $8,000 worth of Bitcoin to the dark web marketplace.

Two days later, Wan messaged the marketplace’s administrator, stating that the transferred Bitcoin did not show up in his escrow account on the site. The next day, the marketplace administrator asked Wan for the Bitcoin address to which Wan had sent the payment. In response, Wan identified the Bitcoin wallet address and provided a screenshot of the transaction. When the administrator said that the address Wan provided was not in their system, Wan replied, “Damn. I guess I lost $8k. I’m sending $8k to escrow now.” Wan then electronically transferred an additional Bitcoin payment worth approximately $8,000 to the marketplace. …

About a week later, on April 29, 2022, Wan electronically transferred another payment of approximately $8,000 worth of Bitcoin to the dark web marketplace to ensure his escrow account contained the total required to complete the order. ...

On May 10, 2022, after the value of Bitcoin dropped, Wan electronically transferred another payment of approximately $1,200 worth of Bitcoin to the marketplace to ensure his escrow account still contained the total required to complete the order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jimmy Zhong story is much better, an almost perfect crime by an almost master criminal who made one mistake he should have know better than to do.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/17/crypto911.html

 

  • In 2012, someone stole 50,000 bitcoin from the Silk Road, an illegal dark web marketplace. Over time, the value of the stolen bitcoin skyrocketed to more than $3 billion dollars and for years it remained one of the biggest mysteries in the world of cryptocurrency.
  • Almost a decade after the 2012 hack, the thief made a critical mistake that allowed the IRS-CI to crack the case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

The Jimmy Zhong story is much better, an almost perfect crime by an almost master criminal who made one mistake he should have know better than to do.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/10/17/crypto911.html

 

  • In 2012, someone stole 50,000 bitcoin from the Silk Road, an illegal dark web marketplace. Over time, the value of the stolen bitcoin skyrocketed to more than $3 billion dollars and for years it remained one of the biggest mysteries in the world of cryptocurrency.
  • Almost a decade after the 2012 hack, the thief made a critical mistake that allowed the IRS-CI to crack the case.

 

Transferred ~$800 of $1+ billion to Coinbase (or similar exchange with identity attached) 😂😂😂

 

Can't make this ish up. 

 

Also, approaching investigators and cops for a marginal theft of a tiny increment of that $1 billion?!?! The f*ck was he thinking?!?!

Edited by TwoCitiesCapital
Link to comment
Share on other sites

YouTube - Bloomberg Originals [October 26th 2023] : Documentaries : RUIN: Money, Ego and Deception at FTX.

 

Better than Netflix, I would say.

 

What a scoundrel, hack, distance aperture and empty suit [, while in T-shirt and shorts]. Just a wicked thief.

 

My class teacher in high school sometimes used the term and talked about 'rich people's stupid and dumb children'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always wondered how good a "trader" SBF actually was at Jane Street. The first interview I read of his where he described a japanese bitcoin arbitrage that he claimed was an example of how his trading firm Alameda was running rings around the crypto market. But later it turned out there were legal and regulatory limitations that meant the trade was unlikely to be scalable in any useful size.

 

Then FTX collapsed, in part because Alameda had lost so much money. Then Michael Lewis described how "smart" SBF was at tricking other Jane Street traders into giving him profitable bets, and again it turns out that SBF got the math wrong and his bet was about as far from optimal as possible. How smart is this guy really?  I think one sign of intelligence is not lying in public in ways that are sure to bite you in the ass later.

Edited by ValueArb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From WSJ

 

"FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s media tour after the crypto exchange’s collapse is coming back to haunt him in court.

While cross-examing Bankman-Fried, assistant U.S. attorney Danielle Sassoon brought up his interviews last year with Twitter personality Mario Nawfal and Financial Times journalist Joshua Oliver. In those interviews, Bankman-Fried said he was intentionally not involved in Alameda’s trading decisions in 2022 because he was concerned about conflict of interest."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon is still focusing heavily on Bankman-Fried’s public statements, particularly those related to assuring customers that their money was safe on FTX. Bankman-Fried is repeatedly saying he doesn’t remember some of these statements, although acknowledges they may have occurred.

“You recall saying that you had built a responsible system,” she said. “No, but I may have,” he answered. She then asked whether he had said FTX had a healthy take on risk management. “No, but I may have,” he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried is confronted by his own tweets about customer protection during a cross-examination.

In one instance, Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon brought up a 2021 tweet in which Bankman-Fried said the crypto exchange’s “user funds and safety come first.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bankman-Fried is facing questions about a document about FTX’s core principles, which he promoted publicly, including before Congress. The principals included maintaining adequate liquid resources so FTX could return customer assets upon request.

“You submitted this under oath to Congress, right?” Sassoon asked. He acknowledged he had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bankman-Fried has been hesitant to answer questions about whether Alameda had special privileges on the FTX platform.

“Sitting here today, you don’t recall assuring customers that Alameda generally played by the same traders as other customers on FTX?” asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon. “I’m not sure,” Bankman-Fried said. In one email she displayed in court, he said Alameda’s account was like everyone else’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon is asking Bankman-Fried about his many statements in media interviews. “I’m saying I don’t remember,” he said about one. “I’m not sure what I said,” he said about another.

In one email exchange displayed in court, he told WSJ reporter Patricia Kowsmann that Alameda and its traders didn’t have special access to certain data or trading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was totally wrong about "positive EV" way of thinking and failed to understand Kelly Criterion as well as ergodicity. This is pretty crazy because that's how he based all his decisions. Destined to blow up...

 

He's no genius & is out of touch with reality. Even some of his lines in the book such as those about Shakespeare reek of someone who was playing the "aloof genius" character (in addition to the hair, outfit, etc).

 

Just given his answers in the court room as well as to Michael Lewis, one can see a habitual "fudging the truth" and "evasive answers" modus operandi & the guy even admits he just says things that people want to hear to win them over (while "multitasking" on some computer game). Amazing how many "professionals" put their faith in this guy and were enthralled from the moment they met him...Michael Lewis included.

Edited by Dalal.Holdings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Parsad changed the title to Cryptocurrencies

For anyone interested, here's the thread that definitively shows how SBF has no idea what Kelly Criterion means:

 

 

 

It's amazing to me that an MIT graduate with a bachelor's in physics and a minor in mathematics doesn't understand Kelly. It also shows the dangers of people mindlessly wielding economic theories which are full of assumptions and caveats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...