7 ms·

https://nitter.net/brian_armstrong/status/1524233480040710144 https://nitter.net/brian_armstrong/status/152423348004071014... In other words: We only disclosed

https://nitter.net/brian_armstrong/status/1524233480040710144 https://nitter.net/brian_armstrong/status/152423348004071014... In other words: We only disclosed these risk factors because we were legally required to. Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter. There are no risk factors, your money is safe, the music will never stop.

duxup 4y ago
Somehow that’s even less comforting…. But I suppose that’s the rabbit hole crypto fans go down.
gennarro 4y ago
“There are no risk factors” doesn’t inspire much confidence in me, even if this specific situation isn’t of much concern to Coinbase management.
oefrha 4y ago
I get the point, but please don’t use a block quote when it’s not a quote. Two problems: 1. People don’t read the source. 2. People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Case in point: there’s already a sibling discussing “There are no risk factors” as if it’s actually a quote from Brian Armstrong.
- dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
  I would argue that's the people's problem. How important is what they have to say anyway if they won't read the source and can't detect sarcasm? edit: also, even if it's not a direct quote.. c'mon, it is what he's saying. The SEC made a rule that applies _specifically for crypto companies_, saying they have to disclose that crypto assets under their custody could potentially be taken in a bankruptcy.. and this guy goes on to say what he was just forced to disclose is not true. It doesn't get more obvious.
  - malfist 4y ago
    It's not a people problem if you're making up quotes and people don't realize it. Use quoting for quotes. Everything else is in your own words, not someone elses, even if you are paraphrasing.
    - DaveSchmindel 4y ago
      Thank you for summing it up this way. It certainly sounds like the original author wants to be taken seriously. In that case they should probably respect the fact that there is literally a word for what they've done. Misquote and its synonyms do not have good connotations, and in their worst form are simply libel...
      - tekknik 4y ago
        If only we took this much care in the news. How many times has both sides misquoted someone? Yet people only seem to care when it’s misquoting the Coinbase CEO.
  - oefrha 4y ago
    “It is what he’s saying” is subjective. A quote is not (or shouldn’t be, despite far too many violations in the real world). Just say “Summary: blah blah” if you want to post your subjective summary.
    - dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
      I do not believe a reasonable human would consider this statement: > Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter. As actually possibly coming from the mouth of the CEO of a company (that is not Elon).
      - oefrha 4y ago
        As I said, > People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Or they just skim part of the comment and jump to reply immediately. Same effect.
- pc86 4y ago
  Ok here are some actual quotes then: "We have no risk of bankruptcy" - objectively false statement "it is possible, however unlikely, that a court would decide to consider customer assets as part of the company in bankruptcy proceedings" - goes against the entire point of his thread, and is also exactly why this disclosure was required The quote above seems like a completely accurate and fair characterization.
  - loceng 4y ago
    > "We have no risk of bankruptcy" Isn't that a statement that the SEC should fine them for?
    - onionisafruit 4y ago
      If he just said that, then probably. In context of the thread it’s clear to me that he means there isn’t a risk eminent bankruptcy.
- ______-_-______ 4y ago
  You make valid points. I edited my post.
maccard 4y ago
I don't have skin in the game (not a crypto fan, not in the US and not an investor in coinbase), but I don't think your sarcasm is warranted here (side note for any other readers, that's _not_ what his linked thread says). Regulatory capture is _real_, and dispraportionately favours incumbents. As regulations are tightened on crypto in general, firms that are not involved in the creation of said regulations are going to find themselves on the wrong side of the law. Furthermore, if _any_ organization has a reputation of taking sides, it's the SEC.
- gonzo41 4y ago
  The thing with crypto is its just reinventing money and all the same crap over. Right now it's like banking in the 1820's with no parachute. Crypto isn't living up to it's PR an I don't really understand why people can't see its flaws.
  - tekknik 4y ago
    > Crypto isn't living up to it's PR an I don't really understand why people can't see its flaws. Because people are trying to get rich off of it. I believe a majority know it’s a horrible “currency”, they just want money.
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    It is probably because we don't understand finance, economics or their history. There is an obligatory xkcd somewhere but I'm too lazy to find it. Software people occasionally find great solutions for existing problems pre-tech X. As experts in tech X they tend to trivialize existing domain knowledge because obviously X has disrupted all that. Edit: I got less lazy. https://m.xkcd.com/793/ https://m.xkcd.com/793/
  - maccard 4y ago
    I never claimed otherwise, simply that a massive disclosure of risk is going to favour the instituitions that the disclosure of risk was designed for.
- duxup 4y ago
junon 4y ago
This is not a direct quote, please don't use blockquotes. It's disingenuous.
- p49k 4y ago
  It’s a direct quote from the 2nd tweet in his thread.
  - junon 4y ago
    Er, no. It's not. And the GP was edited already not to use blockquotes, so my comment is now moot.
    - tekknik 4y ago
      Are you this quick to jump on media / news orgs that misquote others? Just curious.
      - junon 4y ago
        Yes.
        tekknik 4y ago
        Good.
raverbashing 4y ago
> 3. We believe our Prime and Custody customers have strong legal protections in their terms of service that protects their assets, even in a black swan event like this > 4. For our retail customers, we’re taking further steps to update our user terms such that we offer the same protections to those customers in a black swan event. We should have had these in place previously, so let me apologize for that. > 5. ...and it is possible, however unlikely, that a court would decide to consider customer assets as part of the company in bankruptcy proceeding The term people might want to google is "bail-in". And it is likely that Coinbase has less protections related to that than a conventional bank.

duxup 4y ago

Somehow that’s even less comforting…. But I suppose that’s the rabbit hole crypto fans go down.

gennarro 4y ago

“There are no risk factors” doesn’t inspire much confidence in me, even if this specific situation isn’t of much concern to Coinbase management.

oefrha 4y ago

I get the point, but please don’t use a block quote when it’s not a quote. Two problems: 1. People don’t read the source. 2. People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Case in point: there’s already a sibling discussing “There are no risk factors” as if it’s actually a quote from Brian Armstrong.

dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
I would argue that's the people's problem. How important is what they have to say anyway if they won't read the source and can't detect sarcasm? edit: also, even if it's not a direct quote.. c'mon, it is what he's saying. The SEC made a rule that applies _specifically for crypto companies_, saying they have to disclose that crypto assets under their custody could potentially be taken in a bankruptcy.. and this guy goes on to say what he was just forced to disclose is not true. It doesn't get more obvious.
- malfist 4y ago
  It's not a people problem if you're making up quotes and people don't realize it. Use quoting for quotes. Everything else is in your own words, not someone elses, even if you are paraphrasing.
  - DaveSchmindel 4y ago
    Thank you for summing it up this way. It certainly sounds like the original author wants to be taken seriously. In that case they should probably respect the fact that there is literally a word for what they've done. Misquote and its synonyms do not have good connotations, and in their worst form are simply libel...
    - tekknik 4y ago
      If only we took this much care in the news. How many times has both sides misquoted someone? Yet people only seem to care when it’s misquoting the Coinbase CEO.
- oefrha 4y ago
  “It is what he’s saying” is subjective. A quote is not (or shouldn’t be, despite far too many violations in the real world). Just say “Summary: blah blah” if you want to post your subjective summary.
  - dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
    I do not believe a reasonable human would consider this statement: > Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter. As actually possibly coming from the mouth of the CEO of a company (that is not Elon).
    - oefrha 4y ago
      As I said, > People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Or they just skim part of the comment and jump to reply immediately. Same effect.
pc86 4y ago
Ok here are some actual quotes then: "We have no risk of bankruptcy" - objectively false statement "it is possible, however unlikely, that a court would decide to consider customer assets as part of the company in bankruptcy proceedings" - goes against the entire point of his thread, and is also exactly why this disclosure was required The quote above seems like a completely accurate and fair characterization.
- loceng 4y ago
  > "We have no risk of bankruptcy" Isn't that a statement that the SEC should fine them for?
  - onionisafruit 4y ago
    If he just said that, then probably. In context of the thread it’s clear to me that he means there isn’t a risk eminent bankruptcy.
______-_-______ 4y ago
You make valid points. I edited my post.

maccard 4y ago

I don't have skin in the game (not a crypto fan, not in the US and not an investor in coinbase), but I don't think your sarcasm is warranted here (side note for any other readers, that's _not_ what his linked thread says). Regulatory capture is _real_, and dispraportionately favours incumbents. As regulations are tightened on crypto in general, firms that are not involved in the creation of said regulations are going to find themselves on the wrong side of the law. Furthermore, if _any_ organization has a reputation of taking sides, it's the SEC.

gonzo41 4y ago
The thing with crypto is its just reinventing money and all the same crap over. Right now it's like banking in the 1820's with no parachute. Crypto isn't living up to it's PR an I don't really understand why people can't see its flaws.
- tekknik 4y ago
  > Crypto isn't living up to it's PR an I don't really understand why people can't see its flaws. Because people are trying to get rich off of it. I believe a majority know it’s a horrible “currency”, they just want money.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  It is probably because we don't understand finance, economics or their history. There is an obligatory xkcd somewhere but I'm too lazy to find it. Software people occasionally find great solutions for existing problems pre-tech X. As experts in tech X they tend to trivialize existing domain knowledge because obviously X has disrupted all that. Edit: I got less lazy. https://m.xkcd.com/793/ https://m.xkcd.com/793/
- maccard 4y ago
  I never claimed otherwise, simply that a massive disclosure of risk is going to favour the instituitions that the disclosure of risk was designed for.
duxup 4y ago

junon 4y ago

This is not a direct quote, please don't use blockquotes. It's disingenuous.

p49k 4y ago
It’s a direct quote from the 2nd tweet in his thread.
- junon 4y ago
  Er, no. It's not. And the GP was edited already not to use blockquotes, so my comment is now moot.
  - tekknik 4y ago
    Are you this quick to jump on media / news orgs that misquote others? Just curious.
    - junon 4y ago
      Yes.
      - tekknik 4y ago
        Good.

raverbashing 4y ago

> 3. We believe our Prime and Custody customers have strong legal protections in their terms of service that protects their assets, even in a black swan event like this > 4. For our retail customers, we’re taking further steps to update our user terms such that we offer the same protections to those customers in a black swan event. We should have had these in place previously, so let me apologize for that. > 5. ...and it is possible, however unlikely, that a court would decide to consider customer assets as part of the company in bankruptcy proceeding The term people might want to google is "bail-in". And it is likely that Coinbase has less protections related to that than a conventional bank.