4 ms·

Internet and computer access are "how federal bail works" as bail condition for serious internet and computer based crime?

maxbond 4y ago
He didn't commit a computer based crime. We don't know yet that the wallet wasn't seized by authorities. It's super suspicious, and if he withdrew the money the hammer will come down on him, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions.
themitigating 4y ago
This is a financial crimes right?
UncleMeat 4y ago
He is being charged with conspiracy, securities fraud, and money laundering. Those are financial crimes. They are only "computer-based" in the sense that cryptocurrency is coded as "tech" and he ran a website. This is in contrast to something like malicious exploitation of computer systems and being charged under the CFAA.
- notch656c 4y ago
  ... the crime revolved around use of computers and incentivizing people to fund and use his FTX computer based "exchange." It seems like a hard stretch to not consider it computer based.
  - qwytw 4y ago
    Any financial crime in the past 20-30 years is computer based according to that definition.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    So is every fraudster since like 2010 a "computer criminal?" People are usually restricted from using a computer because they're alleged to be hackers, eg, they're using a computer to break the law, not conducting business over a computer that happens to be fraudulent. He was already forbidden to do the thing he may have done. If he did, things are going to go very poorly for him. Again, from where I'm standing, it's just as likely that he gave the wallet up to prosecutors, perhaps as part of a plea deal. It's entirely possible he's attempting to make off with it, but I don't see any reason to jump to that conclusion without additional evidence. ETA: The no KYC exchange is certainly a strong indication it wasn't prosecutors. Perhaps he's been hacked, but that wouldn't be my first hypothesis. Seems like extraordinarily poor judgment, but hey, that's kind of his deal I guess. Or I guess the explanation we're all ignoring is; the court did approve this. Possibly, as someone pointed out elsewhere in the thread, to pay his legal fees.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
akerl_ 4y ago
Sidestepping for a second that he wasn’t charged with internet or computer based crimes, “yes”.
- notch656c 4y ago
  Good to know the alleged crime wasn't centered around FTX, a computer-based "exchange" and internet website.
  - akerl_ 4y ago
    The list of crimes he’s been indicted for is public. It does not include computer crimes.

maxbond 4y ago

He didn't commit a computer based crime. We don't know yet that the wallet wasn't seized by authorities. It's super suspicious, and if he withdrew the money the hammer will come down on him, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

themitigating 4y ago

This is a financial crimes right?

UncleMeat 4y ago

He is being charged with conspiracy, securities fraud, and money laundering. Those are financial crimes. They are only "computer-based" in the sense that cryptocurrency is coded as "tech" and he ran a website. This is in contrast to something like malicious exploitation of computer systems and being charged under the CFAA.

notch656c 4y ago
... the crime revolved around use of computers and incentivizing people to fund and use his FTX computer based "exchange." It seems like a hard stretch to not consider it computer based.
- qwytw 4y ago
  Any financial crime in the past 20-30 years is computer based according to that definition.
- maxbond 4y ago
  So is every fraudster since like 2010 a "computer criminal?" People are usually restricted from using a computer because they're alleged to be hackers, eg, they're using a computer to break the law, not conducting business over a computer that happens to be fraudulent. He was already forbidden to do the thing he may have done. If he did, things are going to go very poorly for him. Again, from where I'm standing, it's just as likely that he gave the wallet up to prosecutors, perhaps as part of a plea deal. It's entirely possible he's attempting to make off with it, but I don't see any reason to jump to that conclusion without additional evidence. ETA: The no KYC exchange is certainly a strong indication it wasn't prosecutors. Perhaps he's been hacked, but that wouldn't be my first hypothesis. Seems like extraordinarily poor judgment, but hey, that's kind of his deal I guess. Or I guess the explanation we're all ignoring is; the court did approve this. Possibly, as someone pointed out elsewhere in the thread, to pay his legal fees.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

akerl_ 4y ago

Sidestepping for a second that he wasn’t charged with internet or computer based crimes, “yes”.

notch656c 4y ago
Good to know the alleged crime wasn't centered around FTX, a computer-based "exchange" and internet website.
- akerl_ 4y ago
  The list of crimes he’s been indicted for is public. It does not include computer crimes.