26 ms·

FTX Contagion

303 points by KoftaBob 4y ago

jiggawatts 4y ago
Wow… Telstra!? They’re a telco!! What in the world are they doing investing in dodgy crypto firms?
- senko 4y ago
  Telstra Ventures - they're a VC subsidiary: https://golden.com/wiki/Telstra_Ventures-PB4Z33Y https://golden.com/wiki/Telstra_Ventures-PB4Z33Y
- _joel 4y ago
  What's a teacher pension fund doing the same thing?
  - twelve40 4y ago
    diversifying with a hyped-up fomo thing at the time? they have >200 billion so it's kind of a rounding error for them. In fact, for the majority of outfits listed, "contagion" sounds too dramatic. $24mil for Blackrock?
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
  - edent 4y ago
    Because they have a huge amount of assets - but also a growing pool of pensions to pay out. So it makes sense for them to put a limited part of those funds into risky ventures. I'm sure at some point they invested in, for example, Apple when that looked like a dangerous proposition. To be clear - I think anyone "investing" in crypto is likely to lose out in the long run. But if you are a large institution it makes sense to spread yourself into as many ventures as possible.
- syllogism 4y ago
  It's a venture fund, as a lot of large companies have. I don't really get the argument for it, I think it's pretty dumb overall. But it's not that uncommon.
  - defrost 4y ago
    FWiW their exposure is relatively low, the figure quoted is an investment of "1 - 10 million", that's against all other investments made by that Testra fund of which many are on the order of 20 to 40 million, and a few at 100, 200, and 900 million.
srge 4y ago
Seems like a good time to remember this deleted hagiography of SBF by Sequoia: https://web.archive.org/web/20221027180943/https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlight/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221027180943/https://www.sequo...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mvineetmenon 4y ago
  Lol.. Twitter was flooded with screenshots of such articles (paid or otherwise) praising SBF.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    I think a lot of journalists, experts, and politicians arrived at the same conclusion around the same time, which is that credibility isn't worth bothering with because there's a base level of people who will unquestioningly believe them if they make them feel the right way. If you're angry at the right people and causes, and you "stand with" and support the correct things, then truth and reason is not relevant. Actually it's something dangerous to be feared, because it could cause uncomfortable emotions.
    - the_snooze 4y ago
      > credibility isn't worth bothering with because there's a base level of people who will unquestioningly believe them if they make them feel the right way It reminds me of this tweet/picture/article >Rebecca Grossman’s perfect life became a perfect nightmare. “Everything changed in a split second—overnight,” she tells Los Angeles during a half-hour Zoom call from her lawyer’s office in October. that conveniently buries the lede that she was a drunk who ran down and killed two kids. https://twitter.com/LAmag/status/1594917490366337025 https://twitter.com/LAmag/status/1594917490366337025
- rjzzleep 4y ago
  Better title would be: "I wouldn't take advice from sequoia if my life depended on it and you should not either"
rapsey 4y ago
Sequoia really made fools out of themselves here. When you listen to VCs they always sing their praises. Is it an emperor has no clothes situation?
- danuker 4y ago
  Hindsight 20/20. But how have they sized their bet? Maybe $210M is a drop in the $85B AUM bucket for them, and maybe even including this loss they get better returns than the market, from their investments overall.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Ygg2 4y ago
    Hindsight 20/20? Anyone could tell you can't solve financial/social troubles with just moar tech. And a distributed hash collision generator couldn't gain that much $$$ without something super shady. This isn't hindsight 20/20. This is having eyes and not averting your gaze.
  - klelatti 4y ago
    > Hindsight 20/20. Valid point if they had effective due diligence but they didn't. FTX on a cost basis was 3% of the committed capital for the fund that held FTX. A minimal amount of due diligence on FTX would have saved them $150m and increased the fund's return by 3% - not a trivial amount. Plus their name gave FTX credibility that probably led to others investing and losing money.
    - nico 4y ago
      > Plus their name gave FTX credibility that probably led to others investing This is key. Have some friends who got into YC. As soon as they did, they had investors offering them money who had barely even seen their deck. Probably the same happens with Sequoia. Investors see that Sequoia invested and they just blindly follow suit.
    - 4y ago
twawaaay 4y ago
Contagion is a poor word, IMO. I would use "house of cards". "Contagion" suggest completely innocent players getting affected and dragging others. IMO anybody "investing" large sums of money on behalf of others is responsible for understanding what they are doing. I use quotes around investing because most of these companies do not really invest even on a good day when they don't touch crypto -- most just speculate on price which is completely different from investing -- which is putting money into something that produces more money because you think it is is sound and will be producing more in the future.
- davidgerard 4y ago
  it's the proper term in economics, but yes
  - twawaaay 4y ago
    It is, but I don't like it because it suggests that things happened to affected companies due to purely external reasons. It is like my daughter saying "the glass fell from the table and broke". No, it was you who dropped the glass or at least placed the glass in vulnerable position where it can tip off the table easily. Blaming the glass for it breaking is not very useful because it elicits no correction and same for companies -- suggesting companies were innocent bystanders suggests nothing has to or can be done about it.
    - davidgerard 4y ago
      even in economic usage, there's often an implication of "and then these craven assholes", c.f. the recent FSOC paper on systemic risk of crypto
    - anonymoushn 4y ago
      Sure, just like if someone leaves their money in Paypal or Wells Fargo it's their fault they got scammed.
- dmak 4y ago
  > Contagion is a poor word > "Contagion" suggest completely innocent players getting affected and dragging others. ??? That is what is happening in the FTX saga... What are you talking about?
tyler33 4y ago
for blackrock is nothing 24 million
HelloNurse 4y ago
As others have noted, these exposures are not all the same: for the large funds appearing in the diagram tens of millions are harmless losses, while for small imprudent entities smaller stakes can mean certain doom. Adding enough context to classify FTX contaminations on the slaughter - useful lesson spectrum would be a valuable improvement.
sho 4y ago
The further I scroll down that list of ridiculous pseudo-businesses on the right hand side, the louder I hear that famous quote from The Critic - ".. and nothing of value was lost!"
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Hey there is a YC company in there
  - Macha 4y ago
    YC has been criticized for investments in the past that are unethical, or poor financial bets or both. So YC investments aren't immune from falling under "nothing of value"
    - species9606 4y ago
      Recent example: Kalthi
5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
That you can still buy/sell the FTT token is pretty funny. seems like cryptocurrency has become a casino for IRL events via tokens. Where real events are treated as transactions reflected in $$$ [1]. also seems most of the interesting cryptocurrency activity (like million dollar liquidations) happens entirely off blockchain, on centralized exchanges (maybe?). [1] https://insidebitcoins.com/news/arg-sinks-almost-30-after-world-cup-loss-against-saudi-arabia https://insidebitcoins.com/news/arg-sinks-almost-30-after-wo...
- throw_me_5555 4y ago
  It was always funny to watch BTC news and it's impact on prices. The "this is good for Bitcoin" slogan is not that weird when prices overreact to news, go in opposite direction than the expected impact of new information or has huge swings in price while nothing happens on financial markets.
- donkeyd 4y ago
  > seems most of the interesting cryptocurrency activity (like million dollar liquidations) happens entirely off blockchain, on centralized exchanges (maybe?). Correct. I commented this before, but if you compare (for Bitcoin) total daily transaction volume from Coinmarketcap (which probably isn't complete) to the actual transaction volume on the blockchain, something like 80% of transactions does not involve the blockchain. At least, that's from the top of my head from the last time I did the math. And those blockchain transactions are probably in part moving from hot to cold storage by exchanges and people moving around crypto through personal accounts. If decentralization is the main feature of crypto, then we might as well stop using it right away, since nobody seems to actually care about it.
fredgrott 4y ago
Proper word is fraud. Not just that customer funds were comingled but that Alameda possibly never even made positive money in any year of its existence as the original trade that SBF tells of its creation is in fact a lie as of late 2017 Japan no longer paid premiums for crypto including bitcoin as it was down to 0.3% on charts. In fact only one left to pay premiums on bitcoin due to its illegal cash flow is still Hong Kong per charts at 30%. The fraud play SBF was doing in which certain speculators were involved in and PUSHING to blind public was the crashing of other tokens. It also included VCs in doing such fraud. In fact one shark tank host was involved. SEC regulation is coming to crypto, whether they want it now or not due to all this fraud by bad actors in the financial community. Everyone should note that the fraud was bigger due to the financial communities involvement in the fraud.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  > In fact only one left to pay premiums on bitcoin due to its illegal cash flow is still Hong Kong per charts at 30%. What? There is no HKD bitcoin premium.
geeky4qwerty 4y ago
Maybe someone can help illuminate a nagging question I've had for quite sometime around this whole FTX debacle: Practically every single VC seed round story I've heard from new/young founders is that the process is nothing short of a colonoscopy into not only their business, but also their professional network, and even their personal lives! I look at the list of institutional investors, from the "big boys" in the VC game, to pension funds and I can't for the life of me believe the current narrative that every level of due diligence checks seemed to fail in this single edge case. From a systems perspective this doesn't make me think "oh what a crazy one off, people must have been sleeping at the wheel", this makes me think "this isn't a bug, this is a feature." So the real question is, how many more proverbial rotten apples are in the basket of VC?
- popotamonga 4y ago
  My friend had his funding rejected because during the DD the cto did not pickup the phone from a strange number. they wanted to speak privatly to him.
  - winstonprivacy 4y ago
    I once had an investor who I thought was a great fit for both me and the business. We clicked on every level. We shared the same goals, philosophy, way of thinking about things. I loved him. A few days before making his decision, he called me at 11pm. I knew exactly what was happening. If I didn't pick up, he probably would think I'm a 9-5'er (which I'm not). If I did, I would probably be getting into a long-term relationship with a guy who considered him more important than my family. He'd probably want me jumping on planes at the last second to show him slides, mentoring his other founders, etc. This wasn't my first deal. I was successful. I decided to not pick up. The deal fell through, predictably. But I couldn't be happier with my decision.
- thinkingemote 4y ago
  I share the nagging question! The only thing I can think of is that he was "making money" quickly, showing his skills as a trader. This...greed...might have been blinding to the investors. Where angel Investors or VC will gamble with an unknown founder and their untried product, SBF was making money and the product seemed too good to fail?
moondowner 4y ago
Not sure why Binance is not listed in Investors, as they are actually the first investor in FTX. https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1590012124864348160 https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1590012124864348160
- smcl 4y ago
  They appear in the right-most column a little further down the page, with $580m of "funds" locked up in FTX. If I recall correctly they sold their stake in FTX for a quantity of tokens like FTT, and it was the (ultimately unsuccessful) attempt to sell these that triggered the beginning of the collapse.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  SBF bought out their share in FTX (using stolen customer deposits) in 2021: https://decrypt.co/76584/ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-fried-why-bought-out-binance-investment-shares-exit https://decrypt.co/76584/ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-fried-why-bough...
doctor_eval 4y ago
I just wanna praise Molly White for the awesome work they do. https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ should be required reading for the whole internet.
- rideontime 4y ago
  *she does
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Does referring to someone as "they" when you are unsure of their chosen pronouns count as misgendering?
    - doctor_eval 4y ago
      To add to that, some context: I really didn’t intend to start a gender thing - I would prefer us to focus on Molly’s awesomeness - but I live with people of various genders and these days “they” tends to be my default pronoun choice. I even started to refer to my cat and my wife as “they” despite them being cis gendered. I will certainly apologise if I have offended Molly.
    - rideontime 4y ago
      when she has her pronouns in her bio yeah
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
xg15 4y ago
About the "???" arrow between FTX and FTX US: Is the official explanation really that both companies just happened to file for bankruptcy on the same day but are in no way related?
KoftaBob 4y ago
Does anyone have any idea what might've happened to the $900M labeled "?" in the arrow from Genesis (Lending Branch)?
FollowingTheDao 4y ago
It would be something if this FTX crime committed by SBF is the thing that triggers an economic depression.
tibbydudeza 4y ago
Shitcoins all the way to the horizon.
raziel414 4y ago
According to the article, Binance has $580 million locked up in FTX. But I thought that Binance sold all their FTX assets, which is what trigger the original bank-run on FTX. Was Binance not able to get their money out? If so, that seems disastrous for Binance.
dqpb 4y ago
In theory, this is exactly what should happen. All the incompetents go insolvent and are purged from the market. Unfortunately, I suspect most of the founders walked away wealthier than they started, and can go on to start their next grift.
freemanofthewan 4y ago
Facing Up to Risk Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2850587 40 Pages Posted: 11 Oct 2016 Last revised: 14 Oct 2016 Barbara H. Fried https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2850587 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2850587

FTX Contagion

303 points by KoftaBob 4y ago

jiggawatts 4y ago

Wow… Telstra!? They’re a telco!! What in the world are they doing investing in dodgy crypto firms?

senko 4y ago
Telstra Ventures - they're a VC subsidiary: https://golden.com/wiki/Telstra_Ventures-PB4Z33Y https://golden.com/wiki/Telstra_Ventures-PB4Z33Y
_joel 4y ago
What's a teacher pension fund doing the same thing?
- twelve40 4y ago
  diversifying with a hyped-up fomo thing at the time? they have >200 billion so it's kind of a rounding error for them. In fact, for the majority of outfits listed, "contagion" sounds too dramatic. $24mil for Blackrock?
- newaccount2021 4y ago
- edent 4y ago
  Because they have a huge amount of assets - but also a growing pool of pensions to pay out. So it makes sense for them to put a limited part of those funds into risky ventures. I'm sure at some point they invested in, for example, Apple when that looked like a dangerous proposition. To be clear - I think anyone "investing" in crypto is likely to lose out in the long run. But if you are a large institution it makes sense to spread yourself into as many ventures as possible.
syllogism 4y ago
It's a venture fund, as a lot of large companies have. I don't really get the argument for it, I think it's pretty dumb overall. But it's not that uncommon.
- defrost 4y ago
  FWiW their exposure is relatively low, the figure quoted is an investment of "1 - 10 million", that's against all other investments made by that Testra fund of which many are on the order of 20 to 40 million, and a few at 100, 200, and 900 million.

srge 4y ago

Seems like a good time to remember this deleted hagiography of SBF by Sequoia: https://web.archive.org/web/20221027180943/https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/sam-bankman-fried-spotlight/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221027180943/https://www.sequo...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mvineetmenon 4y ago
Lol.. Twitter was flooded with screenshots of such articles (paid or otherwise) praising SBF.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  I think a lot of journalists, experts, and politicians arrived at the same conclusion around the same time, which is that credibility isn't worth bothering with because there's a base level of people who will unquestioningly believe them if they make them feel the right way. If you're angry at the right people and causes, and you "stand with" and support the correct things, then truth and reason is not relevant. Actually it's something dangerous to be feared, because it could cause uncomfortable emotions.
  - the_snooze 4y ago
    > credibility isn't worth bothering with because there's a base level of people who will unquestioningly believe them if they make them feel the right way It reminds me of this tweet/picture/article >Rebecca Grossman’s perfect life became a perfect nightmare. “Everything changed in a split second—overnight,” she tells Los Angeles during a half-hour Zoom call from her lawyer’s office in October. that conveniently buries the lede that she was a drunk who ran down and killed two kids. https://twitter.com/LAmag/status/1594917490366337025 https://twitter.com/LAmag/status/1594917490366337025
rjzzleep 4y ago
Better title would be: "I wouldn't take advice from sequoia if my life depended on it and you should not either"

rapsey 4y ago

Sequoia really made fools out of themselves here. When you listen to VCs they always sing their praises. Is it an emperor has no clothes situation?

danuker 4y ago
Hindsight 20/20. But how have they sized their bet? Maybe $210M is a drop in the $85B AUM bucket for them, and maybe even including this loss they get better returns than the market, from their investments overall.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Ygg2 4y ago
  Hindsight 20/20? Anyone could tell you can't solve financial/social troubles with just moar tech. And a distributed hash collision generator couldn't gain that much $$$ without something super shady. This isn't hindsight 20/20. This is having eyes and not averting your gaze.
- klelatti 4y ago
  > Hindsight 20/20. Valid point if they had effective due diligence but they didn't. FTX on a cost basis was 3% of the committed capital for the fund that held FTX. A minimal amount of due diligence on FTX would have saved them $150m and increased the fund's return by 3% - not a trivial amount. Plus their name gave FTX credibility that probably led to others investing and losing money.
  - nico 4y ago
    > Plus their name gave FTX credibility that probably led to others investing This is key. Have some friends who got into YC. As soon as they did, they had investors offering them money who had barely even seen their deck. Probably the same happens with Sequoia. Investors see that Sequoia invested and they just blindly follow suit.
  - 4y ago

twawaaay 4y ago

Contagion is a poor word, IMO. I would use "house of cards". "Contagion" suggest completely innocent players getting affected and dragging others. IMO anybody "investing" large sums of money on behalf of others is responsible for understanding what they are doing. I use quotes around investing because most of these companies do not really invest even on a good day when they don't touch crypto -- most just speculate on price which is completely different from investing -- which is putting money into something that produces more money because you think it is is sound and will be producing more in the future.

davidgerard 4y ago
it's the proper term in economics, but yes
- twawaaay 4y ago
  It is, but I don't like it because it suggests that things happened to affected companies due to purely external reasons. It is like my daughter saying "the glass fell from the table and broke". No, it was you who dropped the glass or at least placed the glass in vulnerable position where it can tip off the table easily. Blaming the glass for it breaking is not very useful because it elicits no correction and same for companies -- suggesting companies were innocent bystanders suggests nothing has to or can be done about it.
  - davidgerard 4y ago
    even in economic usage, there's often an implication of "and then these craven assholes", c.f. the recent FSOC paper on systemic risk of crypto
  - anonymoushn 4y ago
    Sure, just like if someone leaves their money in Paypal or Wells Fargo it's their fault they got scammed.
dmak 4y ago
> Contagion is a poor word > "Contagion" suggest completely innocent players getting affected and dragging others. ??? That is what is happening in the FTX saga... What are you talking about?

tyler33 4y ago

for blackrock is nothing 24 million

HelloNurse 4y ago

As others have noted, these exposures are not all the same: for the large funds appearing in the diagram tens of millions are harmless losses, while for small imprudent entities smaller stakes can mean certain doom. Adding enough context to classify FTX contaminations on the slaughter - useful lesson spectrum would be a valuable improvement.

sho 4y ago

The further I scroll down that list of ridiculous pseudo-businesses on the right hand side, the louder I hear that famous quote from The Critic - ".. and nothing of value was lost!"

quickthrower2 4y ago
Hey there is a YC company in there
- Macha 4y ago
  YC has been criticized for investments in the past that are unethical, or poor financial bets or both. So YC investments aren't immune from falling under "nothing of value"
  - species9606 4y ago
    Recent example: Kalthi

5350-uiop-1130 4y ago

That you can still buy/sell the FTT token is pretty funny. seems like cryptocurrency has become a casino for IRL events via tokens. Where real events are treated as transactions reflected in $$$ [1]. also seems most of the interesting cryptocurrency activity (like million dollar liquidations) happens entirely off blockchain, on centralized exchanges (maybe?). [1] https://insidebitcoins.com/news/arg-sinks-almost-30-after-world-cup-loss-against-saudi-arabia https://insidebitcoins.com/news/arg-sinks-almost-30-after-wo...

throw_me_5555 4y ago
It was always funny to watch BTC news and it's impact on prices. The "this is good for Bitcoin" slogan is not that weird when prices overreact to news, go in opposite direction than the expected impact of new information or has huge swings in price while nothing happens on financial markets.
donkeyd 4y ago
> seems most of the interesting cryptocurrency activity (like million dollar liquidations) happens entirely off blockchain, on centralized exchanges (maybe?). Correct. I commented this before, but if you compare (for Bitcoin) total daily transaction volume from Coinmarketcap (which probably isn't complete) to the actual transaction volume on the blockchain, something like 80% of transactions does not involve the blockchain. At least, that's from the top of my head from the last time I did the math. And those blockchain transactions are probably in part moving from hot to cold storage by exchanges and people moving around crypto through personal accounts. If decentralization is the main feature of crypto, then we might as well stop using it right away, since nobody seems to actually care about it.

fredgrott 4y ago

Proper word is fraud. Not just that customer funds were comingled but that Alameda possibly never even made positive money in any year of its existence as the original trade that SBF tells of its creation is in fact a lie as of late 2017 Japan no longer paid premiums for crypto including bitcoin as it was down to 0.3% on charts. In fact only one left to pay premiums on bitcoin due to its illegal cash flow is still Hong Kong per charts at 30%. The fraud play SBF was doing in which certain speculators were involved in and PUSHING to blind public was the crashing of other tokens. It also included VCs in doing such fraud. In fact one shark tank host was involved. SEC regulation is coming to crypto, whether they want it now or not due to all this fraud by bad actors in the financial community. Everyone should note that the fraud was bigger due to the financial communities involvement in the fraud.

anonymoushn 4y ago
> In fact only one left to pay premiums on bitcoin due to its illegal cash flow is still Hong Kong per charts at 30%. What? There is no HKD bitcoin premium.

geeky4qwerty 4y ago

Maybe someone can help illuminate a nagging question I've had for quite sometime around this whole FTX debacle: Practically every single VC seed round story I've heard from new/young founders is that the process is nothing short of a colonoscopy into not only their business, but also their professional network, and even their personal lives! I look at the list of institutional investors, from the "big boys" in the VC game, to pension funds and I can't for the life of me believe the current narrative that every level of due diligence checks seemed to fail in this single edge case. From a systems perspective this doesn't make me think "oh what a crazy one off, people must have been sleeping at the wheel", this makes me think "this isn't a bug, this is a feature." So the real question is, how many more proverbial rotten apples are in the basket of VC?

popotamonga 4y ago
My friend had his funding rejected because during the DD the cto did not pickup the phone from a strange number. they wanted to speak privatly to him.
- winstonprivacy 4y ago
  I once had an investor who I thought was a great fit for both me and the business. We clicked on every level. We shared the same goals, philosophy, way of thinking about things. I loved him. A few days before making his decision, he called me at 11pm. I knew exactly what was happening. If I didn't pick up, he probably would think I'm a 9-5'er (which I'm not). If I did, I would probably be getting into a long-term relationship with a guy who considered him more important than my family. He'd probably want me jumping on planes at the last second to show him slides, mentoring his other founders, etc. This wasn't my first deal. I was successful. I decided to not pick up. The deal fell through, predictably. But I couldn't be happier with my decision.
thinkingemote 4y ago
I share the nagging question! The only thing I can think of is that he was "making money" quickly, showing his skills as a trader. This...greed...might have been blinding to the investors. Where angel Investors or VC will gamble with an unknown founder and their untried product, SBF was making money and the product seemed too good to fail?

moondowner 4y ago

Not sure why Binance is not listed in Investors, as they are actually the first investor in FTX. https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1590012124864348160 https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1590012124864348160

smcl 4y ago
They appear in the right-most column a little further down the page, with $580m of "funds" locked up in FTX. If I recall correctly they sold their stake in FTX for a quantity of tokens like FTT, and it was the (ultimately unsuccessful) attempt to sell these that triggered the beginning of the collapse.
anonymoushn 4y ago
SBF bought out their share in FTX (using stolen customer deposits) in 2021: https://decrypt.co/76584/ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-fried-why-bought-out-binance-investment-shares-exit https://decrypt.co/76584/ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-fried-why-bough...

doctor_eval 4y ago

I just wanna praise Molly White for the awesome work they do. https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ should be required reading for the whole internet.

rideontime 4y ago
*she does
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Does referring to someone as "they" when you are unsure of their chosen pronouns count as misgendering?
  - doctor_eval 4y ago
    To add to that, some context: I really didn’t intend to start a gender thing - I would prefer us to focus on Molly’s awesomeness - but I live with people of various genders and these days “they” tends to be my default pronoun choice. I even started to refer to my cat and my wife as “they” despite them being cis gendered. I will certainly apologise if I have offended Molly.
  - rideontime 4y ago
    when she has her pronouns in her bio yeah
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]

xg15 4y ago

About the "???" arrow between FTX and FTX US: Is the official explanation really that both companies just happened to file for bankruptcy on the same day but are in no way related?

KoftaBob 4y ago

Does anyone have any idea what might've happened to the $900M labeled "?" in the arrow from Genesis (Lending Branch)?

FollowingTheDao 4y ago

It would be something if this FTX crime committed by SBF is the thing that triggers an economic depression.

tibbydudeza 4y ago

Shitcoins all the way to the horizon.

raziel414 4y ago

According to the article, Binance has $580 million locked up in FTX. But I thought that Binance sold all their FTX assets, which is what trigger the original bank-run on FTX. Was Binance not able to get their money out? If so, that seems disastrous for Binance.

dqpb 4y ago

In theory, this is exactly what should happen. All the incompetents go insolvent and are purged from the market. Unfortunately, I suspect most of the founders walked away wealthier than they started, and can go on to start their next grift.

freemanofthewan 4y ago

Facing Up to Risk Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2850587 40 Pages Posted: 11 Oct 2016 Last revised: 14 Oct 2016 Barbara H. Fried https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2850587 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2850587