5 ms·

I hate to admit this, but I was (briefly) involved with the Ethereum Max project. They gave me a sizable sum of cash up front, no contract, to act as a general

by 58x14 4y ago

I hate to admit this, but I was (briefly) involved with the Ethereum Max project. They gave me a sizable sum of cash up front, no contract, to act as a general and technical consultant. This happened less than 48hrs after I met some of the main "team" which consisted of over two dozen crypto bros and various boxing promoters, none of whom understood the most basic concepts of blockchains, transactions, currency, regulation, etc. I was with them when they contacted Kim to shill, and I actually advised them to take a much different approach, but of course, I was ignored, and I promptly left the project about a week later. EMAX is really the epitome of everything wrong in cryptocurrency and I'm glad to see a fraction of justice being served here. Now if only the dozens of other "team" members who were (from my firsthand perspective) equally culpable in defrauding the public could also be held accountable, that would be great.

eqmvii 4y ago
Have you been in touch with the SEC? Their investigation is ongoing, and it sounds like you might have info that could help them clean things up…
- 58x14 4y ago
  I haven’t reached out to them and I haven’t been contacted. There was a short window where I was super admin for their entire Google workspace, but everything was pretty cryptic and I had limited time to exfil data. I seriously contemplated going public but I started receiving death threats when I left the project, so I took the… cautious approach. Maybe now that the project is wholly sunk, I should make a YouTube video.
  - snek_case 4y ago
    You have a legal responsibility to share the information you know with the SEC. Do what's right and don't be afraid of these tech bros, they're probably busy pissing their pants right now anyways.
    - fortran77 4y ago
      > Do what's right and don't be afraid of these tech bros, they're probably busy pissing their pants right now anyways. This is a good point. While I'm glad they're starting to go after celebrities who tout scams, a lot of these people are "just" reading something from a card or tweeting something in return for a check. They really need to get the folks who contracted with the celebs and told them what to say, too!
    - anonu 4y ago
      > You have a legal responsibility to share the information you know with the SEC Are you a lawyer? Don't think you're right here... Don't take legal advice from random HN threads.
    - whoknew1122 4y ago
      Do what's right, which is to protect your neck. The person doesn't really have anything of substance to add. If the person did decide to go to the SEC, here's what you'd need: 1.) A good lawyer (don't go talking to investigators without a lawyer) 2.) A sit down with the lawyer and the investigators 3.) ??? 4.) Worry if the death threats are actually meaningful A dozen crypto bros may not be too worrying. But you don't know who else got juice from the scheme. There were already unknown boxing promoters mentioned. Boxing is a dirty sport with real organized crime ties. And crypto is used to facilitate huge amounts of money laundering, which attracts criminals of all stripes. Easy for random HN commenter to say go to the SEC. In real life, there are consequences that the person just doesn't need.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Why did you receive death threats?
- shapefrog 4y ago
  Whistleblower awards can range from 10 to 30 percent of the money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million
  - nradov 4y ago
    Pretty sure the whistle has already been blown on this one. But it's always better to be treated as a cooperating witness with an immunity agreement rather than as an indicted co-conspirator. (The SEC can't bring criminal charges, but they do pass on any evidence of criminal activity to the Justice Department.)
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    Seems like there's cash to be made here - find a bullshit blockchain project (not too difficult - finding the opposite is the difficult bit), collect evidence, resign at the first sign of criminal activity, blow the whistle and enjoy a share of the resulting fine.
    - r00fus 4y ago
      This would be a great "natural selector criteria" that whittles down whatever's left of crypto scammers. Another possible benefit is the cost of doing business (by taking valid precautions) for those scammers going up.
Waterluvian 4y ago
As a nonlawyer I’m curious what your risk might be. You accepted money for consulting services from what is apparently some sort of fraud conspiracy? And you seem to have info the SEC would want and might feel compelled to eke out of you with a little pressure. Your story seems to put you in the moral right. But what about the legal right? Is it time to get a quick lawyer checkup? (I’m not implying anything. The answer may very well be a definitive “no, this is a nothingburger.”)
- 58x14 4y ago
  also not a lawyer but I have a fair amount of experience in risk management, and I did consult multiple attorneys prior to my engagement. I’d like to think I made ethical decisions along the way. I won’t disclose more details here, but I was very vocal about my concerns with the project and “team” and I used official social accounts to publicly warn EMAX’s audience to be careful. I still feel pretty guilty for being associated in any way. There is nothing that proves I’m not just making this up. I’m happy to cooperate, but not under pressure.
  - Waterluvian 4y ago
    Just keep in mind that when the Feds have a project they're committed to, they don't care about how you feel about ethics and motivations. They can, without losing any sleep, decide to turn the screws on you for some perceived legal violation in order to get you to co-operate. Your openness to co-operate "but not under pressure" isn't necessarily your choice to make. This feels like one of those times where someone really needs a lawyer but is too "smart" to think they need one. I'm friends with a group of about a dozen current/former criminal defense lawyers and this feels like the beginning of one of their classic stories. Just please be careful. =)
    - 58x14 4y ago
      Thank you :)
  - PKop 4y ago
    >experience in risk management >Makes public statements of involvement in crypto scam being investigated by the SEC >I'd like to think I made ethical decisions...I still feel pretty guilty Stop digging man..
areoform 4y ago
This comment is tongue in cheek, but it's not meant to be pithy nor sarcastic — I mean this with sincerity. Let me be the first to extend my heartfelt congratulations. You avoided the inevitable SEC enforcement action and DoJ indictment! Thanks to your skill, moral backbone and foresight you're not spending $900/hr/head on a cadre of lawyers. That's better than how most people fare in such a scenario. So, congratulations! However, you still need to maintain OPSEC and STFU. You've already said things in other comments that aren't the wisest things to say. I would stop right now and call a very good lawyer. If you don't know how to find one, then call a few and ask whom they'd recommend. Zero in on the choice from there. I sincerely hope that you won't disclose any further details here or elsewhere. Especially in writing. And remember, DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE (without a great lawyer present), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
- 58x14 4y ago
  Good advice and classic video.
- prvit 4y ago
  > You avoided the inevitable SEC indictment! The SEC does not indict people. And FWIW, Kim Kardashian seems to be the only person to be charged here.
  - areoform 4y ago
    Great catch! Fixed. The article says that she copped to the fine and is now cooperating with their investigation?
DIARRHEA_xd 4y ago
Delete this. You have about 6 minutes before the HN window expire. Don't post about involvement during an ongoing investigation, especially not from your main. Even if you think you have done no harm. Speaking from experience :)
- 58x14 4y ago
  this is a throwaway :)
  - bdonlan 4y ago
    You sure you’re posting from the right account? You’ve been using this one for at least 9 months (as far as I bothered going back)
    - 58x14 4y ago
      I think I made this one two years ago?
      - rjbwork 4y ago
        Four years ago, and you have an email in the profile. Better hope nobody can trace you down using subpoenas to registrars via outliir.com
- jejeyyy77 4y ago
  lol, too late. screenshots have already been taken.
aswanson 4y ago
...two dozen crypto bros and boxing promoters... For some reason this sentence had me howling with laughter.
PKop 4y ago
I can't imagine thinking that posting this on a public forum makes any sense at all. You have everything to lose by making statements like this, and nothing to gain.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- oefrha 4y ago
  Never underestimate the lure of appearing in the know. Tons of people met their downfall through babbling about their damaging secrets.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  I wonder, does he have much to lose if he's faking it? After all, we have no way to tell whether he is telling the truth. He might very well be lying for fake internet points.
  - PKop 4y ago
    I guess not, if he's faking it, though "we have no way to tell" is trivially true of most any unverifiable personal anecdotes on the internet. I'd say my statement has an implicit "Assuming this is true..." tacked onto the beginning of it.

by 58x14 4y ago

eqmvii 4y ago

Have you been in touch with the SEC? Their investigation is ongoing, and it sounds like you might have info that could help them clean things up…

58x14 4y ago
I haven’t reached out to them and I haven’t been contacted. There was a short window where I was super admin for their entire Google workspace, but everything was pretty cryptic and I had limited time to exfil data. I seriously contemplated going public but I started receiving death threats when I left the project, so I took the… cautious approach. Maybe now that the project is wholly sunk, I should make a YouTube video.
- snek_case 4y ago
  You have a legal responsibility to share the information you know with the SEC. Do what's right and don't be afraid of these tech bros, they're probably busy pissing their pants right now anyways.
  - fortran77 4y ago
    > Do what's right and don't be afraid of these tech bros, they're probably busy pissing their pants right now anyways. This is a good point. While I'm glad they're starting to go after celebrities who tout scams, a lot of these people are "just" reading something from a card or tweeting something in return for a check. They really need to get the folks who contracted with the celebs and told them what to say, too!
  - anonu 4y ago
    > You have a legal responsibility to share the information you know with the SEC Are you a lawyer? Don't think you're right here... Don't take legal advice from random HN threads.
  - whoknew1122 4y ago
    Do what's right, which is to protect your neck. The person doesn't really have anything of substance to add. If the person did decide to go to the SEC, here's what you'd need: 1.) A good lawyer (don't go talking to investigators without a lawyer) 2.) A sit down with the lawyer and the investigators 3.) ??? 4.) Worry if the death threats are actually meaningful A dozen crypto bros may not be too worrying. But you don't know who else got juice from the scheme. There were already unknown boxing promoters mentioned. Boxing is a dirty sport with real organized crime ties. And crypto is used to facilitate huge amounts of money laundering, which attracts criminals of all stripes. Easy for random HN commenter to say go to the SEC. In real life, there are consequences that the person just doesn't need.
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Why did you receive death threats?
shapefrog 4y ago
Whistleblower awards can range from 10 to 30 percent of the money collected when the monetary sanctions exceed $1 million
- nradov 4y ago
  Pretty sure the whistle has already been blown on this one. But it's always better to be treated as a cooperating witness with an immunity agreement rather than as an indicted co-conspirator. (The SEC can't bring criminal charges, but they do pass on any evidence of criminal activity to the Justice Department.)
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Seems like there's cash to be made here - find a bullshit blockchain project (not too difficult - finding the opposite is the difficult bit), collect evidence, resign at the first sign of criminal activity, blow the whistle and enjoy a share of the resulting fine.
  - r00fus 4y ago
    This would be a great "natural selector criteria" that whittles down whatever's left of crypto scammers. Another possible benefit is the cost of doing business (by taking valid precautions) for those scammers going up.

Waterluvian 4y ago

As a nonlawyer I’m curious what your risk might be. You accepted money for consulting services from what is apparently some sort of fraud conspiracy? And you seem to have info the SEC would want and might feel compelled to eke out of you with a little pressure. Your story seems to put you in the moral right. But what about the legal right? Is it time to get a quick lawyer checkup? (I’m not implying anything. The answer may very well be a definitive “no, this is a nothingburger.”)

58x14 4y ago
also not a lawyer but I have a fair amount of experience in risk management, and I did consult multiple attorneys prior to my engagement. I’d like to think I made ethical decisions along the way. I won’t disclose more details here, but I was very vocal about my concerns with the project and “team” and I used official social accounts to publicly warn EMAX’s audience to be careful. I still feel pretty guilty for being associated in any way. There is nothing that proves I’m not just making this up. I’m happy to cooperate, but not under pressure.
- Waterluvian 4y ago
  Just keep in mind that when the Feds have a project they're committed to, they don't care about how you feel about ethics and motivations. They can, without losing any sleep, decide to turn the screws on you for some perceived legal violation in order to get you to co-operate. Your openness to co-operate "but not under pressure" isn't necessarily your choice to make. This feels like one of those times where someone really needs a lawyer but is too "smart" to think they need one. I'm friends with a group of about a dozen current/former criminal defense lawyers and this feels like the beginning of one of their classic stories. Just please be careful. =)
  - 58x14 4y ago
    Thank you :)
- PKop 4y ago
  >experience in risk management >Makes public statements of involvement in crypto scam being investigated by the SEC >I'd like to think I made ethical decisions...I still feel pretty guilty Stop digging man..

areoform 4y ago

This comment is tongue in cheek, but it's not meant to be pithy nor sarcastic — I mean this with sincerity. Let me be the first to extend my heartfelt congratulations. You avoided the inevitable SEC enforcement action and DoJ indictment! Thanks to your skill, moral backbone and foresight you're not spending $900/hr/head on a cadre of lawyers. That's better than how most people fare in such a scenario. So, congratulations! However, you still need to maintain OPSEC and STFU. You've already said things in other comments that aren't the wisest things to say. I would stop right now and call a very good lawyer. If you don't know how to find one, then call a few and ask whom they'd recommend. Zero in on the choice from there. I sincerely hope that you won't disclose any further details here or elsewhere. Especially in writing. And remember, DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE (without a great lawyer present), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

58x14 4y ago
Good advice and classic video.
prvit 4y ago
> You avoided the inevitable SEC indictment! The SEC does not indict people. And FWIW, Kim Kardashian seems to be the only person to be charged here.
- areoform 4y ago
  Great catch! Fixed. The article says that she copped to the fine and is now cooperating with their investigation?

DIARRHEA_xd 4y ago

Delete this. You have about 6 minutes before the HN window expire. Don't post about involvement during an ongoing investigation, especially not from your main. Even if you think you have done no harm. Speaking from experience :)

58x14 4y ago
this is a throwaway :)
- bdonlan 4y ago
  You sure you’re posting from the right account? You’ve been using this one for at least 9 months (as far as I bothered going back)
  - 58x14 4y ago
    I think I made this one two years ago?
    - rjbwork 4y ago
      Four years ago, and you have an email in the profile. Better hope nobody can trace you down using subpoenas to registrars via outliir.com
jejeyyy77 4y ago
lol, too late. screenshots have already been taken.

aswanson 4y ago

...two dozen crypto bros and boxing promoters... For some reason this sentence had me howling with laughter.

PKop 4y ago

I can't imagine thinking that posting this on a public forum makes any sense at all. You have everything to lose by making statements like this, and nothing to gain.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
oefrha 4y ago
Never underestimate the lure of appearing in the know. Tons of people met their downfall through babbling about their damaging secrets.
Nextgrid 4y ago
I wonder, does he have much to lose if he's faking it? After all, we have no way to tell whether he is telling the truth. He might very well be lying for fake internet points.
- PKop 4y ago
  I guess not, if he's faking it, though "we have no way to tell" is trivially true of most any unverifiable personal anecdotes on the internet. I'd say my statement has an implicit "Assuming this is true..." tacked onto the beginning of it.