2 ms·

I hate to be the That Guy this time, but pump-and-dump is a different kind of fraud from a Ponzi. Not that anyone cares to make the distinction anymore.

• tptacek 4y ago
  Hey, that guy, tell it to Matt Levine and SBF, who literally used the term in the interview. :) I'm just reacting to the idea that you'd need to see the SBF corporations laid out on a diagram to reach the conclusion. When Carrell's character says "they aren't confessing, they're bragging", he's talking about an allusion. The Ponzi schemes here are not allusive. SBF literally bragged about them.
  • SilasX 4y ago
    That still doesn't mean they're using the term properly, at least in regards to kind of scam you were describing in your comment, or what that comment's parent was referring to. "SBF/Matt Levine said it" does not automatically make it true.
    • piva00 4y ago
      To be honest, you don't explain how they are wrong and then tell us that "SBF/Matt Levine" saying it doesn't make it true but both have a public recognisable background in finance, we have absolutely no idea who you are to even judge if you could be right or not. Instead of debating semantics, enlighten us with how/why they are using it incorrectly and what you mean by this being a pump and dump and not a Ponzi. To me it definitely looks like a Ponzi: money from new entrants in the system go to pay off earlier entrants, a pump and dump from what I know would require SBF/FTX pumping up FTT to then dump it all leaving bag holders in the wake of the crash.
      • SilasX 4y ago
        That's fair -- I thought that by highlighting the correct term, against the parent's description with its mislabeling, that would be enough to make the point, especially since a) the issue of "Ponzi" misuse comes up so much, and b) one could just look up the terms and compare. But, to make it explicit: Ponzi scheme: Taking later entrants' investments to pay earlier investors on the false pretense that the venture's activity generated the returns. pump-and-dump: Duping others into thinking an asset has value so that it can be resold above its legit worth. The original description given clearly fits pump-and-dump better[1], since it's based on making an asset seem valuable: >>laid the Ponzi scheme straight out: scammers make boxes that pay fake coins when you store your money in them, they put so much money into the boxes that the fake coins seem valuable, then they rug pull everyone and move on to the next one. For tptacek's part, he could have defended his claim by presenting a substantive understanding of the distinction and justified the label in his own words. Or, somehow indicated this was a point of contention at all. Or done anything whatsoever beyond arguing, in effect, "the perp used the label, therefore it must be accurate". That does not advance the discussion, or indicate a prompt for the kind of contribution in the first half of this comment. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33562224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33562224