4 ms·

The funny thing is for six months I have been checking FTX for open developer positions. Thinking surely, the best place in crypto must be hiring good devs like

The funny thing is for six months I have been checking FTX for open developer positions. Thinking surely, the best place in crypto must be hiring good devs like me. And there have been no postings at all! And word on the street is their devs actually building the exchange made a middling salary with zero stock. I always found it odd, how could they not be hiring? even during the downturn? And now I know why, it was all a scam.

skippyboxedhero 4y ago
It wasn't. They just ran with significantly less staff (iirc, less than 30). If they wanted you, they got in touch. FTX wasn't a scam either. Their business was a licence to print money but, as so often happens in finance, managed to spin shit from gold.
- fdgsdfogijq 4y ago
  That's not what I have heard. Specifically know people who have gotten offers, mostly in the 150k range with zero stock. Alameda research is also just random devs that went to MIT with a few years experience. Impressive to go to that school, but clearly not experienced enough to run a real finance operation. Zero real finance people. If they were serious they would have hired portfolio managers with decades of experience. Its the same thing as three arrows capital, random people ending up with a bunch of capital, overestimating their intelligence due to a bull market run, and ending up with nothing
  - mi_lk 4y ago
    definitely know one guy hired by FTX intl in the past 6 months so "If they wanted you, they got in touch." seems true to me
    - fdgsdfogijq 4y ago
      "If they wanted you, they got in touch." you make it sound like a prestigious elite club. it was a scam, and it should be called out as such. also again i personally know two people that received stingy offers from them
      - colinmhayes 4y ago
        FTX made a boatload of money. They just threw it all away at the casino.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
    > Zero real finance people Debate old as time. I agree with you but this happens every cycle. RenTech doesn't have "real finance people" either. Maybe the problem was that they just had the wrong people, not their level of realness. And Alameda seemed to be mainly people from Jane Street? There is a difference between trading firms with good tech (Jane Street) and firms taking prop risk (DE Shaw)...just based on what has been released, I agree that they didn't seem to know what they were doing. Unfortunately, the market doesn't know you went to MIT. And they wouldn't have hired PMs with decades of experience, because no PM with decades of experience would have worked there.
    - MichaelDickens 4y ago
      > There is a difference between trading firms with good tech (Jane Street) and firms taking prop risk (DE Shaw) What do you mean by this? What is DE Shaw doing that Jane Street isn't?
      - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
        DE Shaw takes directional risk. They have a lot of conventional strategies iirc (distressed debt, credit, etc.). Jane Street does a lot of ETF AP and other strategies that optimize for technology (afaik).
        blitzar 4y ago
        Alameda is/was strategies that optimize for technology, arbitrage etc. But with a massive one way directional long bet over the top. Run by people with 1-2 years experience in shops that run a market neutral profile , in an environment where they believed the underlying asset goes up every single day.
  - joshxyz 4y ago
    I've worked with a crypto trading firm before, one of FTX's otc clients. In that industry we hire based on referrals and rarely on credentials. A trustworthy person who earns the company $0 is worth more than an unvetted one that could stab the company in the back anytime in the future.
    - propogandist 4y ago
      due diligence to maintain the ponzi scheme; incredible.
- squidbeak 4y ago
  Concealing from users they were gambling with their funds - and not a scam?
  - throw827474737 4y ago
    Hey, in crypto not all is a scam. Some are a proper pyramid scheme, others outright betrayal, and few are just stupid or for fun (:
  - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
    I would read the rest of what I said. Is NYSE a scam? Is Euronext a scam? The exchange was a legit business that was profitable...outside of fixed costs, it isn't possible to lose money with an exchange. But they were doing other stuff (broking) that did lose them money. These are two completely distinct operations though (in real finance, they are largely distinct).
    - twblalock 4y ago
      As Matt Levine mentioned in his article today, no responsible bank would allow you to borrow money and give them shares of their own stock as collateral. In some cases it's illegal to do so, but even when it's legal, banks would not want the risk. FTX, on the other hand, pretty much did just that. Does that make FTX a scam? No. But when they told their customers they don't gamble with customer deposits, that was at least incomplete and misleading, and may have crossed the line into being intentionally deceptive. Of course, even if people knew about this, they probably would have used FTX anyway because people do crazy things in a bubble market.
      - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
        Right, but irresponsible banks have done that before and, at the very least, that is self-liquidating on the way down (the same with companies issuing stock to employees). And whether they are gambling with your money or not, they were a mix of a bank and an exchange...so the comparison with a bank isn't complete. They were booking derivatives trades so your money is 100% at-risk, irregardless of what they do with customer deposits. This is what prime brokers do (as Levine says in that article). The reason you don't lend against your own shares is because you won't be able to get financing and are exposed to runs. It is unrelated to the point about customers who were already at risk because they were trading derivatives issued by FTX.
- miohtama 4y ago
  FTX had staff of 300 earlier, so it has grown.
firekvz 4y ago
They just hire people from other places, cheaper labor, I know at least 4 southamericans who worked for them in the past, 100% remote, same talent as an US dev, and 1/4 of the cost
ZephyrBlu 4y ago
They were hiring. I applied a few months ago and got an email from them, but never followed up.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

skippyboxedhero 4y ago

It wasn't. They just ran with significantly less staff (iirc, less than 30). If they wanted you, they got in touch. FTX wasn't a scam either. Their business was a licence to print money but, as so often happens in finance, managed to spin shit from gold.

fdgsdfogijq 4y ago
That's not what I have heard. Specifically know people who have gotten offers, mostly in the 150k range with zero stock. Alameda research is also just random devs that went to MIT with a few years experience. Impressive to go to that school, but clearly not experienced enough to run a real finance operation. Zero real finance people. If they were serious they would have hired portfolio managers with decades of experience. Its the same thing as three arrows capital, random people ending up with a bunch of capital, overestimating their intelligence due to a bull market run, and ending up with nothing
- mi_lk 4y ago
  definitely know one guy hired by FTX intl in the past 6 months so "If they wanted you, they got in touch." seems true to me
  - fdgsdfogijq 4y ago
    "If they wanted you, they got in touch." you make it sound like a prestigious elite club. it was a scam, and it should be called out as such. also again i personally know two people that received stingy offers from them
    - colinmhayes 4y ago
      FTX made a boatload of money. They just threw it all away at the casino.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- skippyboxedhero 4y ago
  > Zero real finance people Debate old as time. I agree with you but this happens every cycle. RenTech doesn't have "real finance people" either. Maybe the problem was that they just had the wrong people, not their level of realness. And Alameda seemed to be mainly people from Jane Street? There is a difference between trading firms with good tech (Jane Street) and firms taking prop risk (DE Shaw)...just based on what has been released, I agree that they didn't seem to know what they were doing. Unfortunately, the market doesn't know you went to MIT. And they wouldn't have hired PMs with decades of experience, because no PM with decades of experience would have worked there.
  - MichaelDickens 4y ago
    > There is a difference between trading firms with good tech (Jane Street) and firms taking prop risk (DE Shaw) What do you mean by this? What is DE Shaw doing that Jane Street isn't?
    - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
      DE Shaw takes directional risk. They have a lot of conventional strategies iirc (distressed debt, credit, etc.). Jane Street does a lot of ETF AP and other strategies that optimize for technology (afaik).
      - blitzar 4y ago
        Alameda is/was strategies that optimize for technology, arbitrage etc. But with a massive one way directional long bet over the top. Run by people with 1-2 years experience in shops that run a market neutral profile , in an environment where they believed the underlying asset goes up every single day.
- joshxyz 4y ago
  I've worked with a crypto trading firm before, one of FTX's otc clients. In that industry we hire based on referrals and rarely on credentials. A trustworthy person who earns the company $0 is worth more than an unvetted one that could stab the company in the back anytime in the future.
  - propogandist 4y ago
    due diligence to maintain the ponzi scheme; incredible.
squidbeak 4y ago
Concealing from users they were gambling with their funds - and not a scam?
- throw827474737 4y ago
  Hey, in crypto not all is a scam. Some are a proper pyramid scheme, others outright betrayal, and few are just stupid or for fun (:
- skippyboxedhero 4y ago
  I would read the rest of what I said. Is NYSE a scam? Is Euronext a scam? The exchange was a legit business that was profitable...outside of fixed costs, it isn't possible to lose money with an exchange. But they were doing other stuff (broking) that did lose them money. These are two completely distinct operations though (in real finance, they are largely distinct).
  - twblalock 4y ago
    As Matt Levine mentioned in his article today, no responsible bank would allow you to borrow money and give them shares of their own stock as collateral. In some cases it's illegal to do so, but even when it's legal, banks would not want the risk. FTX, on the other hand, pretty much did just that. Does that make FTX a scam? No. But when they told their customers they don't gamble with customer deposits, that was at least incomplete and misleading, and may have crossed the line into being intentionally deceptive. Of course, even if people knew about this, they probably would have used FTX anyway because people do crazy things in a bubble market.
    - skippyboxedhero 4y ago
      Right, but irresponsible banks have done that before and, at the very least, that is self-liquidating on the way down (the same with companies issuing stock to employees). And whether they are gambling with your money or not, they were a mix of a bank and an exchange...so the comparison with a bank isn't complete. They were booking derivatives trades so your money is 100% at-risk, irregardless of what they do with customer deposits. This is what prime brokers do (as Levine says in that article). The reason you don't lend against your own shares is because you won't be able to get financing and are exposed to runs. It is unrelated to the point about customers who were already at risk because they were trading derivatives issued by FTX.
miohtama 4y ago
FTX had staff of 300 earlier, so it has grown.

firekvz 4y ago

They just hire people from other places, cheaper labor, I know at least 4 southamericans who worked for them in the past, 100% remote, same talent as an US dev, and 1/4 of the cost

ZephyrBlu 4y ago

They were hiring. I applied a few months ago and got an email from them, but never followed up.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]