4 ms·

I would be cashing out as fast as humanly possible. And setting aside a good chunk for taxes and legal fees...

paulpauper 5y ago
no need to do that. just convert to dai stablecoin and just let it sit for years or split it up among many defi protocols to collect interest. no way to trace it, nor any need to do anything.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  This is fraud. Crypto doesn’t magically make it not fraud. Edit: @hprotagonist, you too! Shouldn’t have to go comment by comment pointing out the fraud suggestions.
  - paulpauper 5y ago
    how was his suggestion any less fraudulent if the intent is to cash out and not return the money
    - ryan_lane 5y ago
      Because "code is law" and if there was a bug, that was part of the law of the code. It's not fraud. If it was, the threat would have been different, right?
    - deelowe 5y ago
      I was wondering the same thing.
      - zarzavat 5y ago
        One is against crypto people. According to HN morality, cryptocurrency is wrong so wrong+wrong = right. The other is against a government. According to HN morality, governments are right, so wrong+right = wrong.
  - systemsignal 5y ago
    How is it fraud if the smart contract allowed it? Actually curious what makes it fraud. Just because one group wants the money back?
    - toomuchtodo 5y ago
      Lawful intention. What the smart contract dictates isn’t necessarily the final authority, but what the intent was (per legal interpretation of state contract law).
      - shkkmo 5y ago
        smart contracts are actually legally contracts (nor all that smart.)
        crooked-v 5y ago
        I think you're missing a 'not'.
      - enlyth 5y ago
        Code is law! No wait.. not like that! The crypto evangelist mental gymnastics never cease to amaze me
      - tdeck 5y ago
        This kinda belies the whole premise behind "smart" "contracts", doesn't it? I've always heard that the point of smart contracts is that we don't need the legal system to settle issues, because the code itself enforces the contract. Apparently code can have bugs, and people can make mistakes? Whoops, wish we'd known those things before pouring millions into this stuff.
        Stevvo 5y ago
        The idea of "Code is law" as an absolute died back in 2016 with the DAO fork. A better way to see it is like "law is law", which is obviously untrue as we have things like case law/common law.

no need to do that. just convert to dai stablecoin and just let it sit for years or split it up among many defi protocols to collect interest. no way to trace it, nor any need to do anything.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
This is fraud. Crypto doesn’t magically make it not fraud. Edit: @hprotagonist, you too! Shouldn’t have to go comment by comment pointing out the fraud suggestions.
- paulpauper 5y ago
  how was his suggestion any less fraudulent if the intent is to cash out and not return the money
  - ryan_lane 5y ago
    Because "code is law" and if there was a bug, that was part of the law of the code. It's not fraud. If it was, the threat would have been different, right?
  - deelowe 5y ago
    I was wondering the same thing.
    - zarzavat 5y ago
      One is against crypto people. According to HN morality, cryptocurrency is wrong so wrong+wrong = right. The other is against a government. According to HN morality, governments are right, so wrong+right = wrong.
- systemsignal 5y ago
  How is it fraud if the smart contract allowed it? Actually curious what makes it fraud. Just because one group wants the money back?
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    Lawful intention. What the smart contract dictates isn’t necessarily the final authority, but what the intent was (per legal interpretation of state contract law).
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      smart contracts are actually legally contracts (nor all that smart.)
      - crooked-v 5y ago
        I think you're missing a 'not'.
    - enlyth 5y ago
      Code is law! No wait.. not like that! The crypto evangelist mental gymnastics never cease to amaze me
    - tdeck 5y ago
      This kinda belies the whole premise behind "smart" "contracts", doesn't it? I've always heard that the point of smart contracts is that we don't need the legal system to settle issues, because the code itself enforces the contract. Apparently code can have bugs, and people can make mistakes? Whoops, wish we'd known those things before pouring millions into this stuff.
      - Stevvo 5y ago
        The idea of "Code is law" as an absolute died back in 2016 with the DAO fork. A better way to see it is like "law is law", which is obviously untrue as we have things like case law/common law.