49 ms·

Where were the adults in any of this and why would people throw billions of dollars at unqualified children?

by throwaway0asd 4y ago

nathanaldensr 4y ago
The people of the world have gone that insane.
- twblalock 4y ago
  The people of the world were always this way, and the same thing happened in normal banking until it was regulated.
rinze 4y ago
It's unregulated and decentralized, and banks are not your friends. To be honest, they're not, but that doesn't make any of this Ponzi 2.0 economy great.
bannedbybros 4y ago
memish 4y ago
Like Elizabeth Holmes, they are kids of the elite who are well connected and supported at high levels. Further, SBF is one of the biggest political donors and there may be corruption in the SEC. The general counsel of FTX US had served as lead counsel to Chairman Gensler at the CFTC. And then there's this from a congressman yesterday, "@GaryGensler runs to the media while reports to my office allege he was helping SBF and FTX work on legal loopholes to obtain a regulatory monopoly. We're looking into this." https://twitter.com/RepTomEmmer/status/1590717374801809409 https://twitter.com/RepTomEmmer/status/1590717374801809409
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  - solardev 4y ago
    He probably means "looking into how I can get in on it"
  - anon291 4y ago
    Good point. That must mean democrats can do no wrong. /s This sort of non sequitur is dangerous to democracy.
    - hotpotamus 4y ago
      You might notice that I didn't say that. But I am skeptical that the party that has branded itself as the anti-regulation party for my entire life is really going to embrace regulation all of a sudden in response to the malfeasance of someone they perceive as being a political enemy.
      - anon291 4y ago
        > embrace regulation all of a sudden in response to the malfeasance of someone they perceive as being a political enemy. Given the GOP's willingness to strong-arm twitter and facebook (remember Trump tried to have it investigated by the DoJ), I feel like regulating companies due to being a political enemy is exactly what I'd expect the GOP to do. Perhaps it's the one time you can be sure they'll start regulating. From my perspective, the democratic party is constantly talking about how bad Citizens United is (and I am very sympathetic to that) while taking millions upon millions from large companies and wealthy individuals.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        anon291 4y ago
        > I remember thinking at the time when the Senate called Zuckerberg up to yell at him that if I were Zuck, I would have just said, "thanks for the tax cut, dudes". They can jail you for that.
Machado117 4y ago
Adults were throwing their life savings at it
SantalBlush 4y ago
>why would people throw billions of dollars at unqualified children? Because investors had too much cash and became increasingly desperate to earn a return on it. When they have an abundance of cash, they become wreckless and wasteful with their investing as they chase profits.
- naijaboiler 4y ago
  same cause of the 2008 recession, too much money chasing risky bets. Once the party gets going, you will be stupid to not join in. Just amke sure you're not the one holding the bag, when the music sotps.
PheonixPharts 4y ago
Because most of the adults know that there is a window when you can get rich off a known con and get out before it blows up with quite a lot of cash. The best part of these being unqualified children is that they don't even realize that part of the deal they've signed up for is to take the fall when shit finally hits the fan. There's plenty of people who have made money from SBF behind the scenes, but you'll never hear their names.
- tartoran 4y ago
  This couldn’t be further from the truth. SBF had enablers who knew what this was from the beginning but kept mum about it. They actually helped hype it up then exit with profits.
  - PheonixPharts 4y ago
    I'm confused because you say "this couldn't be further from the truth" and the state pretty much exactly what I was saying.
- digianarchist 4y ago
  Really? I'm only reading about VCs [0] and big institutional investors [1] losing money. [0] - https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/10/daily-crunch-sequoia-capital-writes-off-its-210m-investment-in-crypto-exchange-ftx/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/10/daily-crunch-sequoia-capit... [1] - https://www.otpp.com/en-ca/about-us/news-and-insights/2022/ontario-teachers--statement-on-ftx/ https://www.otpp.com/en-ca/about-us/news-and-insights/2022/o...
gonehome 4y ago
He worked at Jane Street prior to starting his own company which was built on a successful arbitrage. Whatever his issues - qualification isn’t one of them. I’m not defending this catastrophe (which seems like it was partly an execution by a rival), but this kind of comment is just bizarre on hacker news in the world of tech companies and startups. Age is not a good proxy for competence.
- boshalfoshal 4y ago
  Don't know why you are getting downvoted. Yes, I believe that using customer funds to punt shitcoins at a supposed "quant market making firm" is really dumb, but people here really think the people in this operation are random idiots/got there via underhanded means. I think they just believed that the gravy train would last longer than they thought. Several Alameda employees worked at JS, which is by far one of the most successful quant firms out there and they only hire the best. He also exploited a very creative arbitrage to start the firm, which is also not a fluke. Then again, I would expect no less since the people on here constantly complain about leetcode interviews and "not wanting to interview for big tech for XYZ random reasons" when I know damn well they couldn't pass even if you gave them the answer.
  - gonehome 4y ago
    The median HN user isn’t that bright and this topic in particular is one where the noise is such that the comments here are atypically bad. The outliers are great and make this site worth it, but on some topics (of which crypto is one) they’re hard to find.
    - throwaway0asd 4y ago
      There are valid reasons why discussions of crypto turn out so very bad: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33117833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33117833
      - gonehome 4y ago
_jal 4y ago
This is the result the "crypto community" asked for. They may not have wanted it, but they asked for it. A combination casino/money laundry/ponzi breeding ground also comes with intelligent crooks who are capable of running longer games. You want recourse? That means oversight, audits and regulation.
paxys 4y ago
This (now removed) Sequoia profile on SBF and FTX is all that you need to know about why things went down the way they did – https://web.archive.org/web/20221027181005/https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlight/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221027181005/https://www.sequo...

Where were the adults in any of this and why would people throw billions of dollars at unqualified children?

nathanaldensr 4y ago

The people of the world have gone that insane.

twblalock 4y ago
The people of the world were always this way, and the same thing happened in normal banking until it was regulated.

rinze 4y ago

It's unregulated and decentralized, and banks are not your friends. To be honest, they're not, but that doesn't make any of this Ponzi 2.0 economy great.

bannedbybros 4y ago

memish 4y ago

Like Elizabeth Holmes, they are kids of the elite who are well connected and supported at high levels. Further, SBF is one of the biggest political donors and there may be corruption in the SEC. The general counsel of FTX US had served as lead counsel to Chairman Gensler at the CFTC. And then there's this from a congressman yesterday, "@GaryGensler runs to the media while reports to my office allege he was helping SBF and FTX work on legal loopholes to obtain a regulatory monopoly. We're looking into this." https://twitter.com/RepTomEmmer/status/1590717374801809409 https://twitter.com/RepTomEmmer/status/1590717374801809409

hotpotamus 4y ago
- solardev 4y ago
  He probably means "looking into how I can get in on it"
- anon291 4y ago
  Good point. That must mean democrats can do no wrong. /s This sort of non sequitur is dangerous to democracy.
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    You might notice that I didn't say that. But I am skeptical that the party that has branded itself as the anti-regulation party for my entire life is really going to embrace regulation all of a sudden in response to the malfeasance of someone they perceive as being a political enemy.
    - anon291 4y ago
      > embrace regulation all of a sudden in response to the malfeasance of someone they perceive as being a political enemy. Given the GOP's willingness to strong-arm twitter and facebook (remember Trump tried to have it investigated by the DoJ), I feel like regulating companies due to being a political enemy is exactly what I'd expect the GOP to do. Perhaps it's the one time you can be sure they'll start regulating. From my perspective, the democratic party is constantly talking about how bad Citizens United is (and I am very sympathetic to that) while taking millions upon millions from large companies and wealthy individuals.
      - hotpotamus 4y ago
        anon291 4y ago
        > I remember thinking at the time when the Senate called Zuckerberg up to yell at him that if I were Zuck, I would have just said, "thanks for the tax cut, dudes". They can jail you for that.

Machado117 4y ago

Adults were throwing their life savings at it

SantalBlush 4y ago

>why would people throw billions of dollars at unqualified children? Because investors had too much cash and became increasingly desperate to earn a return on it. When they have an abundance of cash, they become wreckless and wasteful with their investing as they chase profits.

naijaboiler 4y ago
same cause of the 2008 recession, too much money chasing risky bets. Once the party gets going, you will be stupid to not join in. Just amke sure you're not the one holding the bag, when the music sotps.

PheonixPharts 4y ago

Because most of the adults know that there is a window when you can get rich off a known con and get out before it blows up with quite a lot of cash. The best part of these being unqualified children is that they don't even realize that part of the deal they've signed up for is to take the fall when shit finally hits the fan. There's plenty of people who have made money from SBF behind the scenes, but you'll never hear their names.

tartoran 4y ago
This couldn’t be further from the truth. SBF had enablers who knew what this was from the beginning but kept mum about it. They actually helped hype it up then exit with profits.
- PheonixPharts 4y ago
  I'm confused because you say "this couldn't be further from the truth" and the state pretty much exactly what I was saying.
digianarchist 4y ago
Really? I'm only reading about VCs [0] and big institutional investors [1] losing money. [0] - https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/10/daily-crunch-sequoia-capital-writes-off-its-210m-investment-in-crypto-exchange-ftx/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/10/daily-crunch-sequoia-capit... [1] - https://www.otpp.com/en-ca/about-us/news-and-insights/2022/ontario-teachers--statement-on-ftx/ https://www.otpp.com/en-ca/about-us/news-and-insights/2022/o...

gonehome 4y ago

He worked at Jane Street prior to starting his own company which was built on a successful arbitrage. Whatever his issues - qualification isn’t one of them. I’m not defending this catastrophe (which seems like it was partly an execution by a rival), but this kind of comment is just bizarre on hacker news in the world of tech companies and startups. Age is not a good proxy for competence.

boshalfoshal 4y ago
Don't know why you are getting downvoted. Yes, I believe that using customer funds to punt shitcoins at a supposed "quant market making firm" is really dumb, but people here really think the people in this operation are random idiots/got there via underhanded means. I think they just believed that the gravy train would last longer than they thought. Several Alameda employees worked at JS, which is by far one of the most successful quant firms out there and they only hire the best. He also exploited a very creative arbitrage to start the firm, which is also not a fluke. Then again, I would expect no less since the people on here constantly complain about leetcode interviews and "not wanting to interview for big tech for XYZ random reasons" when I know damn well they couldn't pass even if you gave them the answer.
- gonehome 4y ago
  The median HN user isn’t that bright and this topic in particular is one where the noise is such that the comments here are atypically bad. The outliers are great and make this site worth it, but on some topics (of which crypto is one) they’re hard to find.
  - throwaway0asd 4y ago
    There are valid reasons why discussions of crypto turn out so very bad: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33117833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33117833
    - gonehome 4y ago

_jal 4y ago

This is the result the "crypto community" asked for. They may not have wanted it, but they asked for it. A combination casino/money laundry/ponzi breeding ground also comes with intelligent crooks who are capable of running longer games. You want recourse? That means oversight, audits and regulation.

paxys 4y ago

This (now removed) Sequoia profile on SBF and FTX is all that you need to know about why things went down the way they did – https://web.archive.org/web/20221027181005/https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlight/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221027181005/https://www.sequo...