6 ms·

This testimony is truly remarkable in its level of petulant whinging. Perhaps the single most astonishing thing in it, though, are screenshots of what appears

This testimony is truly remarkable in its level of petulant whinging. Perhaps the single most astonishing thing in it, though, are screenshots of what appears to be a private group chat with Binance CEO CZ, called "Exchange coordination": https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/63981bda4d894e06ad41c303/Screenshot-2022-12-13-at-1-29-32-AM/0x0.png https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/63981b... https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/63981bfbb439524ded7ab5dd/Screenshot-2022-12-13-at-1-30-02-AM/0x0.png https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/63981b... So not only is he admitting to conspiracy, he's just entered it in the Congressional record!

zeven7 4y ago
Interesting. It's odd that b) and c) are the same screenshot. I wonder if he intended to post a different one. It was extremely weird for CZ to accuse SBF of trying to depeg Tether with a $250k short. I don't know what to make of that. Also strange is how CZ asked for group admin permission from another person at FTX and then went right away to asking if anyone objected to removing SBF from the group. I guess the group was managed by FTX and CZ was attempting to take control of it as FTX was collapsing.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  Zane worked at Bitfinex and Okex prior to FTX so he could credibly have been admin of this group prior to FTX existing.
- ChainOfFools 4y ago
  I think it's pretty obvious what's happening. CZ, not yet fully aware that he is dealing with an unsophisticated bumbler (and thus the risk that this chat would someday be part of congressional testimony), is talking candidly but at cross purposes with Sammy. CZ knows (and presumes SBF also knows) how incredibly thin this market's liquidity really is, and thus the potential destabilization that a mere 250k signal could ignite. while Sammy apparently believes something closer to version of the numbers meant for public FOMO consumption. This little screenshot, (if not eventually proven fabricated, which is almost certainly going to be the counter signal message by CZ, parroted across the crypto community) likely is the biggest bombshell tell in this testimony so far.
  - zeven7 4y ago
    There's zero chance $250k can affect Tether's liquidity. If you were talking $250 million, I'd still highly doubt it, but then you'd be reaching well past what I can dispute. The idea that $250k can budge this market is laughable.
    - mrguyorama 4y ago
      The CEO of binance was upset about it enough to privately message his competitor. Who should we believe, his supposedly private actions, or you.
      - standardly 4y ago
        Just for clarification, from the messages: SBF: "Are you claiming that 250k of USDT would depeg it?" CZ: "no, I don't think 100x that size will succeed. It just cause small issues here and there" Not sure what small issues CZ is referring to, but he's the expert here
    - sgammon 4y ago
      The point isn't the size of the trade; the point is that smart money might follow Alameda, and so news that Alameda is "shorting" Tether might, on its own, be enough for CZ to ask that Sam stop. What's not being pointed out here is that to CZ, and actually even to Sam, there really is no distinction here between Alameda and FTX. CZ is calling him on a position taken by Alameda, via their "Exchange chat," to coordinate between FTX and Binance.
- bufferoverflow 4y ago
  Tether daily trading volume is ~$30 billion. Good luck depegging it with your $0.25 million short.
bathtub365 4y ago
Has he? I know he was scheduled to testify but he didn’t get the chance since he was arrested. Was this written testimony still entered into the record?
- ipython 4y ago
  Yes, I believe committee members referred to it yesterday during the hearing and asked for (and received) unanimous consent for SBF's statement to be put in the record.
  - koolba 4y ago
    They also commented at the utter disrespect for Congress by starting off written testimony with the phrase “I fucked up”. There’s no need for language like that and including it in written testimony is beyond stupid.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      I wish more people would say "I fucked up" in Congressional testimony. It's a lot better than 500 "I don't recall"s.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - dylan604 4y ago
      Depends on if it was genuine or not. "I fucked up" conveys something different to me than "I made a mistake". If it were written by a lawyer, "I knowingly committed a fraud for which I am deeply ashamed and accept full responsibility for my actions" just comes across as being insincere. Maybe it's the time we live in, and also knowing the individual's manners. The lawyerly phrasing always comes across to me as someone saying the things that they think people want to hear. Someone telling me they realized they fucked up comes across as much more sincere. It could just be me though? Also, in today's world, I hold people in contempt that hold congress in respect. So what makes them feel disrespected isn't that high of an "ooooh, burn" kind of moment to see they felt slighted.
ipython 4y ago
Two things - not only do we have centralized exchanges, but they're also coordinating with each other... what was that about decentralization of power again? Oh, and using seven of your 18 page testimony to basically distract from the issue at hand - seems more like a petulant child throwing a tantrum than a serious person running a multi-billion dollar business. Good lord.
- jancsika 4y ago
  > Two things - not only do we have centralized exchanges, but they're also coordinating with each other... what was that about decentralization of power again? That's the beauty of merkle trees-- you just go into your own local copy (or merely paste one from a friend's copy), check your hashes are correct, then upload it to whatever other centralized discovery service of your choice and keep doing business. Even if colluding centralized bad actors tried to append some junk, it only takes one honest friend (or honest you) to get you back to the correct level of nesting dolls. And as long as you can find one honest centralized discovery service to wrap it in, you're back to your original level of convenience. Oh wait, that's git I'm thinking of. Yeah, these customers are absolutely fucked.
hiq 4y ago
I still can't reconcile how verbose he is about pretty much anything that goes through his mind with the fact that both his parents are lawyers.
- joenot443 4y ago
  I've noticed this pattern with other high IQ, well-written people. It's almost a defense mechanism, retreating back to the medium through which they're usually most successful. "If I can put things eloquently enough, perhaps they'll understand why I did what I did." It's not dissimilar to some of the ripped athletic types I'm friends with that try and use their size to an advantage even when the situation definitely doesn't call for it. If a tongue-lashing or an ass-kicking is the immediate gut response, it's probably not the most pragmatic, I've found.
  - lgeorget 4y ago
    It can also be a case of "If I can put things eloquently enough, perhaps they won't understand and give up.". Sometimes it's a defence mechanism to think "if I can't explain myself it's because I'm so much more clever than the others. "
    - curiousgal 4y ago
      The ol' if you can't convince them then confuse them lol
      - boomerango 4y ago
        And if you can’t blind them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit
        philjohn 4y ago
        He's talking to politicians, and a golden rule is: never try to bullshit a bullshitter.
    - 4y ago
323 4y ago
Interesting how the chat is put to delete replies older than 4 weeks. They know it's not smart to leave a trace :)
- dylan604 4y ago
  Isn't there regulation that requires retention of data like this? That's why it's common to see messages along the lines of "we should meet in person to discuss this further". In fact, how does data retention rules specifically apply to apps that don't have large data retention or specifically have no data retention. Besides just making it harder to operate, are there penalties for companies using things like free version of Slack with short windows, or Snapchat/Telegram/Signal with self destructing messages?
  - jlarocco 4y ago
    I can't speak for the others, but the free version of Slack keeps all of your chat data indefinitely. Paying customers can view it, free users can't. Presumably the authorities would get the data from Slack directly.
    - flaviut 4y ago
      that's a screenshot of signal, so the only way the any of the old stuff can be retrieved is if one of the participants saved it outside of signal.
      - dylan604 4y ago
        Doesn't the fact that one of them has screen shots speak volumes in and of itself? Just not sure what it is saying.
  - xwolfi 4y ago
    In the bank I work in, we were fined $200M along with many competitors, because we didnt keep whatsapp records for 10 years, which impedes transparency during timeline reconstruction for investigations. I think SBF is crucified on this alone.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> not only is he admitting to conspiracy This might nail Binance on antitrust charges [1]. If we lack jurisdiction, then on market manipulation of a U.S.-dollar linked asset. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act
xwolfi 4y ago
I find his constant reference to "putting things in the congressional record" quite interesting, as it's normally the congress members who say that, not the witnesses and even less those accused of fraud, who are here to answer questions, not commandeer the record keepers.

zeven7 4y ago

Interesting. It's odd that b) and c) are the same screenshot. I wonder if he intended to post a different one. It was extremely weird for CZ to accuse SBF of trying to depeg Tether with a $250k short. I don't know what to make of that. Also strange is how CZ asked for group admin permission from another person at FTX and then went right away to asking if anyone objected to removing SBF from the group. I guess the group was managed by FTX and CZ was attempting to take control of it as FTX was collapsing.

anonymoushn 4y ago
Zane worked at Bitfinex and Okex prior to FTX so he could credibly have been admin of this group prior to FTX existing.
ChainOfFools 4y ago
I think it's pretty obvious what's happening. CZ, not yet fully aware that he is dealing with an unsophisticated bumbler (and thus the risk that this chat would someday be part of congressional testimony), is talking candidly but at cross purposes with Sammy. CZ knows (and presumes SBF also knows) how incredibly thin this market's liquidity really is, and thus the potential destabilization that a mere 250k signal could ignite. while Sammy apparently believes something closer to version of the numbers meant for public FOMO consumption. This little screenshot, (if not eventually proven fabricated, which is almost certainly going to be the counter signal message by CZ, parroted across the crypto community) likely is the biggest bombshell tell in this testimony so far.
- zeven7 4y ago
  There's zero chance $250k can affect Tether's liquidity. If you were talking $250 million, I'd still highly doubt it, but then you'd be reaching well past what I can dispute. The idea that $250k can budge this market is laughable.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    The CEO of binance was upset about it enough to privately message his competitor. Who should we believe, his supposedly private actions, or you.
    - standardly 4y ago
      Just for clarification, from the messages: SBF: "Are you claiming that 250k of USDT would depeg it?" CZ: "no, I don't think 100x that size will succeed. It just cause small issues here and there" Not sure what small issues CZ is referring to, but he's the expert here
  - sgammon 4y ago
    The point isn't the size of the trade; the point is that smart money might follow Alameda, and so news that Alameda is "shorting" Tether might, on its own, be enough for CZ to ask that Sam stop. What's not being pointed out here is that to CZ, and actually even to Sam, there really is no distinction here between Alameda and FTX. CZ is calling him on a position taken by Alameda, via their "Exchange chat," to coordinate between FTX and Binance.
bufferoverflow 4y ago
Tether daily trading volume is ~$30 billion. Good luck depegging it with your $0.25 million short.

bathtub365 4y ago

Has he? I know he was scheduled to testify but he didn’t get the chance since he was arrested. Was this written testimony still entered into the record?

ipython 4y ago
Yes, I believe committee members referred to it yesterday during the hearing and asked for (and received) unanimous consent for SBF's statement to be put in the record.
- koolba 4y ago
  They also commented at the utter disrespect for Congress by starting off written testimony with the phrase “I fucked up”. There’s no need for language like that and including it in written testimony is beyond stupid.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    I wish more people would say "I fucked up" in Congressional testimony. It's a lot better than 500 "I don't recall"s.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - dylan604 4y ago
    Depends on if it was genuine or not. "I fucked up" conveys something different to me than "I made a mistake". If it were written by a lawyer, "I knowingly committed a fraud for which I am deeply ashamed and accept full responsibility for my actions" just comes across as being insincere. Maybe it's the time we live in, and also knowing the individual's manners. The lawyerly phrasing always comes across to me as someone saying the things that they think people want to hear. Someone telling me they realized they fucked up comes across as much more sincere. It could just be me though? Also, in today's world, I hold people in contempt that hold congress in respect. So what makes them feel disrespected isn't that high of an "ooooh, burn" kind of moment to see they felt slighted.

ipython 4y ago

Two things - not only do we have centralized exchanges, but they're also coordinating with each other... what was that about decentralization of power again? Oh, and using seven of your 18 page testimony to basically distract from the issue at hand - seems more like a petulant child throwing a tantrum than a serious person running a multi-billion dollar business. Good lord.

jancsika 4y ago
> Two things - not only do we have centralized exchanges, but they're also coordinating with each other... what was that about decentralization of power again? That's the beauty of merkle trees-- you just go into your own local copy (or merely paste one from a friend's copy), check your hashes are correct, then upload it to whatever other centralized discovery service of your choice and keep doing business. Even if colluding centralized bad actors tried to append some junk, it only takes one honest friend (or honest you) to get you back to the correct level of nesting dolls. And as long as you can find one honest centralized discovery service to wrap it in, you're back to your original level of convenience. Oh wait, that's git I'm thinking of. Yeah, these customers are absolutely fucked.

hiq 4y ago

I still can't reconcile how verbose he is about pretty much anything that goes through his mind with the fact that both his parents are lawyers.

joenot443 4y ago
I've noticed this pattern with other high IQ, well-written people. It's almost a defense mechanism, retreating back to the medium through which they're usually most successful. "If I can put things eloquently enough, perhaps they'll understand why I did what I did." It's not dissimilar to some of the ripped athletic types I'm friends with that try and use their size to an advantage even when the situation definitely doesn't call for it. If a tongue-lashing or an ass-kicking is the immediate gut response, it's probably not the most pragmatic, I've found.
- lgeorget 4y ago
  It can also be a case of "If I can put things eloquently enough, perhaps they won't understand and give up.". Sometimes it's a defence mechanism to think "if I can't explain myself it's because I'm so much more clever than the others. "
  - curiousgal 4y ago
    The ol' if you can't convince them then confuse them lol
    - boomerango 4y ago
      And if you can’t blind them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit
      - philjohn 4y ago
        He's talking to politicians, and a golden rule is: never try to bullshit a bullshitter.
  - 4y ago

323 4y ago

Interesting how the chat is put to delete replies older than 4 weeks. They know it's not smart to leave a trace :)

dylan604 4y ago
Isn't there regulation that requires retention of data like this? That's why it's common to see messages along the lines of "we should meet in person to discuss this further". In fact, how does data retention rules specifically apply to apps that don't have large data retention or specifically have no data retention. Besides just making it harder to operate, are there penalties for companies using things like free version of Slack with short windows, or Snapchat/Telegram/Signal with self destructing messages?
- jlarocco 4y ago
  I can't speak for the others, but the free version of Slack keeps all of your chat data indefinitely. Paying customers can view it, free users can't. Presumably the authorities would get the data from Slack directly.
  - flaviut 4y ago
    that's a screenshot of signal, so the only way the any of the old stuff can be retrieved is if one of the participants saved it outside of signal.
    - dylan604 4y ago
      Doesn't the fact that one of them has screen shots speak volumes in and of itself? Just not sure what it is saying.
- xwolfi 4y ago
  In the bank I work in, we were fined $200M along with many competitors, because we didnt keep whatsapp records for 10 years, which impedes transparency during timeline reconstruction for investigations. I think SBF is crucified on this alone.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> not only is he admitting to conspiracy This might nail Binance on antitrust charges [1]. If we lack jurisdiction, then on market manipulation of a U.S.-dollar linked asset. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act

xwolfi 4y ago

I find his constant reference to "putting things in the congressional record" quite interesting, as it's normally the congress members who say that, not the witnesses and even less those accused of fraud, who are here to answer questions, not commandeer the record keepers.