15 ms·

How on earth is it possible they can cover a 1.5B loss? Are they really sitting on that much profit, or is the goal to ponzi it out from here, MtGox style?

jqpabc123 2y ago
How on earth is it possible they can cover a 1.5B loss? Easy! They give Binance an IOU in exchange for 1.5 billion BUSD which is just "minted" out of fresh new electrons. Neither of them has really lost anything. Everyone can carry on as if it never happened. In the bizarro world of crypto, this is business as usual.
- killerstorm 2y ago
  How it it different from what banks do? (Except for a central regulator.)
  - tonyhart7 2y ago
    FEDS can print money while Binance does not
    - skeeter2020 2y ago
      not exactly true - Binance is indeed "printing money", just with no centralized regulation. When the Feds do it the expectation is that they are aware of the long-term impacts of doing so, and include in their calculation. For crypto it's the opposite: do it before you erode trust & goodwill to the point where it's no longer valuable. I see it more like it is very different than printing money in a economy that's perceived as stable and quite similar to printing money in one where the people have no faith in the value of sovereign currency. So the crypo-promoters are right about the use-case in certain jurisdictions, but the problem is that's not where the wealth is, so they target rich economies that tend to have stable government currencies & established banking, and do not need crypto for legitimate tasks.
      - tonyhart7 2y ago
        I doubt they can because they peg it to USD, do you think they can pay aws bill with busd??? maybe you can but people with busd would convert it to usd at some point
  - phony-account 2y ago
    > How it it different from what banks do? I often read this sort of comment from crypto-defenders, but is it what banks do? I’m relatively naive about these things, but my impression is that a bank losing this proportion of their assets can’t just ‘pretend’ they have the money, or create ‘new’ money.
    - malfist 2y ago
      That's because they're mistaken. In traditional banking only the central authority can print money, not the individual banks. If someone stole a trillion dollars from JP Morgan, JP Morgan can't make themselves whole by creating a new trillion dollars. The central authority might guarantee the customers of JP Morgan that their money is protected, but they won't print money to make the bank whole.
      - lxgr 2y ago
        That's one model/theory for how modern money creation works. Another is modern monetary theory (MMT), and in that, commercial banks are indeed the primary creators of money, with the central bank playing a technically more passive role. Still, in either model of money creation (i.e. classical "money multiplier" and MMT), governmental regulators (which can be the central bank or others) do ultimately control the rate of money creation via various mechanisms.
      - killerstorm 2y ago
        False. Banks create money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation
        JW_00000 2y ago
        Banks create money by issuing loans; but they can't create money out of thin air if $1.5B was stolen from them.
        malfist 2y ago
        Banks create credit within the confines of law. That isn't creating money. Only the central bank can do that
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    How it it different from what banks do? (Except for a central regulator.) Your exception is the answer. Only the central regulator can "mint" money and doing so has real world consequences. The central regulator has financial incentives to limit this sort of activity. The bizarro world of crypto has no such regulation and as a result, it is inherently unstable. The proof of this is right in front of you --- it is the fact that "stable coins" exist. The only way to bring stability to the bizarro world of crypto is by tying it to "fiat" --- which is the very thing crypto is supposedly working to eliminate. Contradict and hypocrite much?
    - owlninja 2y ago
      I saw a quote somewhere: >Crypto is speedrunning the entire evolution of finance to end up at the same place
      - jqpabc123 2y ago
        I saw a quote somewhere: Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The only thing new about crypto is paper has been replaced by electrons. Individuals/banks minting their own money has been tried before. It didn't go well.
        philipov 2y ago
        However, this quote is usually intended to be a warning, not an opportunity to run all the old scams again. These people hear it and think "You mean we get to repeat history?!"
        mikeyouse 2y ago
        It’s not an uncommon joke about how easy it would be to be a serial killer or bank robber in “the olden days” - just need to move 1 town over and you can do it all again which has a strong similarity to being able to commit crypto crimes with hardly a consequence by virtue of doing it across jurisdictions..
        deleted 2y ago
  - Fade_Dance 2y ago
    Because while banks hold duration, the net value of their current assets, future asset streams, and equity is above zero. Indeed the core focus of the business and regulatory side is ensuring this is so. The central regulator caveat is also a huge caveat to brush aside. During the last round of systemic stress, the banking system essentially got a guarantee that all uninsured deposits would be protected, and banks were allowed to post their collateral for liquidity at terms that no other business has access to. What OP is referencing is the oft-seen practice in the crypto space where failed entities fill an asset hole with propped up tokens, essentially transforming their paper loss on the balance sheet into liquidity risk that doesn't show as readily. The important point here is that in the latter case, the entity may be fully insolvent, even after accounting for future cashflows on loans. When it comes to banks, even the left tail cases like SVB, their "problem assets" are things like long term treasuries, which are way down the risk curve when compared to the ponzi-tokenonics style "stablecoins" that we've seen unwind over the past few years.
  - skeeter2020 2y ago
    Banks don't print money for each other, and if they get money for free it's backstopped by the government and hence all of us. Crypto wants this single aspect but none of the central regulation. Both systems stink for those at the end of the chain, i.e. us; you can decide which one is worse.
    - killerstorm 2y ago
      Banks borrow from each other all the time. What do you think "overnight loans" is for? And when banks gives a loan that creates money
- Saline9515 2y ago
  Binance doesn't mint BUSD, BUSD is emitted by Paxos, which is an american licensed company.
  - jqpabc123 2y ago
    I have a license to drive a car. Having it doesn't limit my ability to mint crypto.
    - Saline9515 2y ago
      https://www.dfs.ny.gov/consumers/alerts/Paxos_and_Binance https://www.dfs.ny.gov/consumers/alerts/Paxos_and_Binance It was approved by the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
      - jqpabc123 2y ago
        From your reference: The Department has not authorized Binance-Peg BUSD on any blockchain, and Binance-Peg BUSD is not issued by Paxos. If you insist, feel free to replace BUSD with an unregulated "stable coin" of your choice. How about FDUSD?
        Saline9515 2y ago
        The sentence right before says "It is important to note that the Department authorized Paxos to issue BUSD on the Ethereum blockchain." As far as I know Binance ended the Binance-pegged BUSD (the BNB chain version bridged from ethereum) without any problem or holder loss?
  - m00dy 2y ago
    Gary Gensler called BUSD a security and banned it years go. What a guy!
    - Saline9515 2y ago
      [flagged]
Gorkys 2y ago
In crypto, there is the concept of the "fictional reserve" which can be used in situations such as this.
- DrillShopper 2y ago
  If it's big enough you can even get the devs to fork the blockchain to reset things (see The DAO) It's not that crypto folks don't want some protection from hacks or fraud - the just think it should only be for the rich.
Saline9515 2y ago
Bybit is one of the most used crypto exchanges and does >100M$ of revenue per month, growing fast. If this isn't enough, I'm sure that every crypto VC would line up to buy a single digit % of their equity to cover up the hole. Crypto hosts the most profitable businesses in the world.
- FabHK 2y ago
  > Crypto hosts the most profitable businesses in the world. Well, because the retail clients expect to get rich and don't mind paying 1% or so fees per exchange. Similarly, the BTC future basis (the difference between the spot price and future price) on many exchanges around 10 to 5 years ago was easily 80% p.a. which you could realize by buying Bitcoin and selling the future. What happened there is that people going long Bitcoin with leverage essentially borrowed the money giving them that leverage at usurious rates (this implied rate is not usually displayed and thus invisible to your average retail client, but definitely very visible to the finance professionals moonlighting in crypto (such as Jane Street, Jump trading, and many others)). Crypto use case: ripping off retail.
  - Saline9515 2y ago
    You pay 1% on Coinbase because they are a quasi monopoly due to regulation. Offshore exchanges take less than 0.1% usually. The neutral rate for perps is 10%, which is lower than the credit card borrowing rate in the USA. And nothing prevents retail investors to earn it by shorting while holding spot. Last, Tether is crypto's most profitable business, and likely the world's most profitable if you account on $ of profit per employee, and is not an exchange.
    - FabHK 2y ago
      Tether is an absolutely remarkable business, indeed. Basically an unregulated bank that pays no interest and follows no KYC/AML/ABC/CTF rules (because they just deal with wholesale, and then the Tethers are transacted on some permissionless "who, me?" blockchain). Remarkable dereliction of responsibility. I don't understand why we let them get away with it.
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
Yes, the profits are insane in that business. Binance was raided for a similar amount, and paid it out easily. Mtgox was raided for ₿650k ($60B in today's money), and plans to return ₿140k to traders. However, I believe most Mtgox investors are better off this way because they were forced to hold onto their investments; otherwise, they would have sold at around $1,000 or so.
- snailmailstare 2y ago
  This loss is more than 5% of their holdings.. To me that implies the supposed benefit of crypto is nonexistent. If an institution is making so much money off your crypto assets that they can return 5% of them, they are a bank doing whatever it was that was so evil.
  - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
    Institution is making money from trading fees which are not too high percentage wise. But the trading activity is very high, for many reasons. A lot more people can participate, from all over the world. Some use it to circumvent sanctions. Some enjoy day trading (no need to deposit $25000, as with US stocks). There are literally millions of instruments to trade. Some like to write algorithms, arbitrage, market making etc. Some dream of 1000x returns (and few do get them).
misja111 2y ago
We don't know if they can cover it. All we know is a statement from their CEO. Can we trust that? Suppose that ByBit couldn't cover the loss, and the CEO would honestly inform the world about it. What would happen? The crypto-equivalent of a bank run. So he would never say that.
hnburnsy 2y ago
I had read they got loans and antcipate paying them back qith recovered proceeds. Interest they could cover with on going operations.
earnesti 2y ago
Fractional reserve helps.
reisse 2y ago
Bybit trading volume is in tens billions of dollars daily. Their comission rate for the retail traders is up to 10bp (0.1%). Even considering a huge part of that volume is coming from institutional players who enjoy significantly reduced commission rates, I think they're surely making few million dollars daily on comissions alone, maybe tens of millions in a good day. And besides comissions, they also have other sources of profit, like staking, crediting customers, and forced liquidations. Being a crypto exchange in current market is very profitable. If the crypto itself does not collapse, I think it's totally possible for them to repay that sum in a year or less.
- evdubs 2y ago
  ByBit's trading volume is almost certainly largely wash trading. Most unregulated crypto exchanges are rife with wash trading. https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783 https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783
- plantain 2y ago
  Most of the trading is not done by retail traders but at much lower fees than that, if not being paid (market makers). I just can't make it add up.
  - spaceman_2020 2y ago
    Hyperliquid, a decentralized perp exchange, is a good proxy for ByBit’s revenues. On an average, Hyperliquid does between 800k-1M in revenue per day. ByBit is substantially bigger and easily does 50-100M in monthly revenue
  - reisse 2y ago
    I know! As I stated, > Even considering a huge part of that volume is coming from institutional players who enjoy significantly reduced commission rates... But the volume is huge. Even if we take the best publicly shared MM rates from Bybit (which is 1.5bp taker commission, 0.5bp maker rebate), and assume the whole volume is traded with these rates, it is still 1bp from 40B dollars, which is 4M dollars daily.
ghhrjfkt4k 2y ago
FXCM forex trading broker covered a similar sized loss of client money (not hack) when EUR/CHF was unpegged in 2015. Since it was a profitable broker business, another bigger broker gave them the money to plug the loss in exchange for taking over the business.
cmcaleer 2y ago
These exchanges make an absurd amount of money. That amount of money is basically a decent quarter for Coinbase in fee revenue, and Bybit is smaller but it isn't that much smaller. It sucks if you're Bybit, but they're going to have plenty of lenders happy to provide them liquidity while they make it all back.
- scrlk 2y ago
  I can understand why some FTX creditors are pissed that the exchange didn't start back up under new management. They would have actually been made whole, unlike the current situation where they're getting "repaid" but pegged to November 2022 valuations (i.e. the absolute bottom of the crypto bear market).
qqqult 2y ago
bybit makes $100 million a month and has substantial excess reserves
- rvz 2y ago
  A lot more money than the majority of AI startups and it is creating jobs rather than purposefully destroying them.
  - laughingcurve 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dang 2y ago
      Please don't cross into personal attack.
  - skeeter2020 2y ago
    yes, great jobs: "I used to have to GO to the casino to play slots, and even without the one arm bandits, had to physically push the button. Now I work from anywhere!"

jqpabc123 2y ago

How on earth is it possible they can cover a 1.5B loss? Easy! They give Binance an IOU in exchange for 1.5 billion BUSD which is just "minted" out of fresh new electrons. Neither of them has really lost anything. Everyone can carry on as if it never happened. In the bizarro world of crypto, this is business as usual.

killerstorm 2y ago
How it it different from what banks do? (Except for a central regulator.)
- tonyhart7 2y ago
  FEDS can print money while Binance does not
  - skeeter2020 2y ago
    not exactly true - Binance is indeed "printing money", just with no centralized regulation. When the Feds do it the expectation is that they are aware of the long-term impacts of doing so, and include in their calculation. For crypto it's the opposite: do it before you erode trust & goodwill to the point where it's no longer valuable. I see it more like it is very different than printing money in a economy that's perceived as stable and quite similar to printing money in one where the people have no faith in the value of sovereign currency. So the crypo-promoters are right about the use-case in certain jurisdictions, but the problem is that's not where the wealth is, so they target rich economies that tend to have stable government currencies & established banking, and do not need crypto for legitimate tasks.
    - tonyhart7 2y ago
      I doubt they can because they peg it to USD, do you think they can pay aws bill with busd??? maybe you can but people with busd would convert it to usd at some point
- phony-account 2y ago
  > How it it different from what banks do? I often read this sort of comment from crypto-defenders, but is it what banks do? I’m relatively naive about these things, but my impression is that a bank losing this proportion of their assets can’t just ‘pretend’ they have the money, or create ‘new’ money.
  - malfist 2y ago
    That's because they're mistaken. In traditional banking only the central authority can print money, not the individual banks. If someone stole a trillion dollars from JP Morgan, JP Morgan can't make themselves whole by creating a new trillion dollars. The central authority might guarantee the customers of JP Morgan that their money is protected, but they won't print money to make the bank whole.
    - lxgr 2y ago
      That's one model/theory for how modern money creation works. Another is modern monetary theory (MMT), and in that, commercial banks are indeed the primary creators of money, with the central bank playing a technically more passive role. Still, in either model of money creation (i.e. classical "money multiplier" and MMT), governmental regulators (which can be the central bank or others) do ultimately control the rate of money creation via various mechanisms.
    - killerstorm 2y ago
      False. Banks create money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation
      - JW_00000 2y ago
        Banks create money by issuing loans; but they can't create money out of thin air if $1.5B was stolen from them.
      - malfist 2y ago
        Banks create credit within the confines of law. That isn't creating money. Only the central bank can do that
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  How it it different from what banks do? (Except for a central regulator.) Your exception is the answer. Only the central regulator can "mint" money and doing so has real world consequences. The central regulator has financial incentives to limit this sort of activity. The bizarro world of crypto has no such regulation and as a result, it is inherently unstable. The proof of this is right in front of you --- it is the fact that "stable coins" exist. The only way to bring stability to the bizarro world of crypto is by tying it to "fiat" --- which is the very thing crypto is supposedly working to eliminate. Contradict and hypocrite much?
  - owlninja 2y ago
    I saw a quote somewhere: >Crypto is speedrunning the entire evolution of finance to end up at the same place
    - jqpabc123 2y ago
      I saw a quote somewhere: Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The only thing new about crypto is paper has been replaced by electrons. Individuals/banks minting their own money has been tried before. It didn't go well.
      - philipov 2y ago
        However, this quote is usually intended to be a warning, not an opportunity to run all the old scams again. These people hear it and think "You mean we get to repeat history?!"
        mikeyouse 2y ago
        It’s not an uncommon joke about how easy it would be to be a serial killer or bank robber in “the olden days” - just need to move 1 town over and you can do it all again which has a strong similarity to being able to commit crypto crimes with hardly a consequence by virtue of doing it across jurisdictions..
      - deleted 2y ago
- Fade_Dance 2y ago
  Because while banks hold duration, the net value of their current assets, future asset streams, and equity is above zero. Indeed the core focus of the business and regulatory side is ensuring this is so. The central regulator caveat is also a huge caveat to brush aside. During the last round of systemic stress, the banking system essentially got a guarantee that all uninsured deposits would be protected, and banks were allowed to post their collateral for liquidity at terms that no other business has access to. What OP is referencing is the oft-seen practice in the crypto space where failed entities fill an asset hole with propped up tokens, essentially transforming their paper loss on the balance sheet into liquidity risk that doesn't show as readily. The important point here is that in the latter case, the entity may be fully insolvent, even after accounting for future cashflows on loans. When it comes to banks, even the left tail cases like SVB, their "problem assets" are things like long term treasuries, which are way down the risk curve when compared to the ponzi-tokenonics style "stablecoins" that we've seen unwind over the past few years.
- skeeter2020 2y ago
  Banks don't print money for each other, and if they get money for free it's backstopped by the government and hence all of us. Crypto wants this single aspect but none of the central regulation. Both systems stink for those at the end of the chain, i.e. us; you can decide which one is worse.
  - killerstorm 2y ago
    Banks borrow from each other all the time. What do you think "overnight loans" is for? And when banks gives a loan that creates money
Saline9515 2y ago
Binance doesn't mint BUSD, BUSD is emitted by Paxos, which is an american licensed company.
- jqpabc123 2y ago
  I have a license to drive a car. Having it doesn't limit my ability to mint crypto.
  - Saline9515 2y ago
    https://www.dfs.ny.gov/consumers/alerts/Paxos_and_Binance https://www.dfs.ny.gov/consumers/alerts/Paxos_and_Binance It was approved by the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
    - jqpabc123 2y ago
      From your reference: The Department has not authorized Binance-Peg BUSD on any blockchain, and Binance-Peg BUSD is not issued by Paxos. If you insist, feel free to replace BUSD with an unregulated "stable coin" of your choice. How about FDUSD?
      - Saline9515 2y ago
        The sentence right before says "It is important to note that the Department authorized Paxos to issue BUSD on the Ethereum blockchain." As far as I know Binance ended the Binance-pegged BUSD (the BNB chain version bridged from ethereum) without any problem or holder loss?
- m00dy 2y ago
  Gary Gensler called BUSD a security and banned it years go. What a guy!
  - Saline9515 2y ago
    [flagged]

Gorkys 2y ago

In crypto, there is the concept of the "fictional reserve" which can be used in situations such as this.

DrillShopper 2y ago
If it's big enough you can even get the devs to fork the blockchain to reset things (see The DAO) It's not that crypto folks don't want some protection from hacks or fraud - the just think it should only be for the rich.

Saline9515 2y ago

Bybit is one of the most used crypto exchanges and does >100M$ of revenue per month, growing fast. If this isn't enough, I'm sure that every crypto VC would line up to buy a single digit % of their equity to cover up the hole. Crypto hosts the most profitable businesses in the world.

FabHK 2y ago
> Crypto hosts the most profitable businesses in the world. Well, because the retail clients expect to get rich and don't mind paying 1% or so fees per exchange. Similarly, the BTC future basis (the difference between the spot price and future price) on many exchanges around 10 to 5 years ago was easily 80% p.a. which you could realize by buying Bitcoin and selling the future. What happened there is that people going long Bitcoin with leverage essentially borrowed the money giving them that leverage at usurious rates (this implied rate is not usually displayed and thus invisible to your average retail client, but definitely very visible to the finance professionals moonlighting in crypto (such as Jane Street, Jump trading, and many others)). Crypto use case: ripping off retail.
- Saline9515 2y ago
  You pay 1% on Coinbase because they are a quasi monopoly due to regulation. Offshore exchanges take less than 0.1% usually. The neutral rate for perps is 10%, which is lower than the credit card borrowing rate in the USA. And nothing prevents retail investors to earn it by shorting while holding spot. Last, Tether is crypto's most profitable business, and likely the world's most profitable if you account on $ of profit per employee, and is not an exchange.
  - FabHK 2y ago
    Tether is an absolutely remarkable business, indeed. Basically an unregulated bank that pays no interest and follows no KYC/AML/ABC/CTF rules (because they just deal with wholesale, and then the Tethers are transacted on some permissionless "who, me?" blockchain). Remarkable dereliction of responsibility. I don't understand why we let them get away with it.

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago

Yes, the profits are insane in that business. Binance was raided for a similar amount, and paid it out easily. Mtgox was raided for ₿650k ($60B in today's money), and plans to return ₿140k to traders. However, I believe most Mtgox investors are better off this way because they were forced to hold onto their investments; otherwise, they would have sold at around $1,000 or so.

snailmailstare 2y ago
This loss is more than 5% of their holdings.. To me that implies the supposed benefit of crypto is nonexistent. If an institution is making so much money off your crypto assets that they can return 5% of them, they are a bank doing whatever it was that was so evil.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
  Institution is making money from trading fees which are not too high percentage wise. But the trading activity is very high, for many reasons. A lot more people can participate, from all over the world. Some use it to circumvent sanctions. Some enjoy day trading (no need to deposit $25000, as with US stocks). There are literally millions of instruments to trade. Some like to write algorithms, arbitrage, market making etc. Some dream of 1000x returns (and few do get them).

misja111 2y ago

We don't know if they can cover it. All we know is a statement from their CEO. Can we trust that? Suppose that ByBit couldn't cover the loss, and the CEO would honestly inform the world about it. What would happen? The crypto-equivalent of a bank run. So he would never say that.

hnburnsy 2y ago

I had read they got loans and antcipate paying them back qith recovered proceeds. Interest they could cover with on going operations.

earnesti 2y ago

Fractional reserve helps.

reisse 2y ago

Bybit trading volume is in tens billions of dollars daily. Their comission rate for the retail traders is up to 10bp (0.1%). Even considering a huge part of that volume is coming from institutional players who enjoy significantly reduced commission rates, I think they're surely making few million dollars daily on comissions alone, maybe tens of millions in a good day. And besides comissions, they also have other sources of profit, like staking, crediting customers, and forced liquidations. Being a crypto exchange in current market is very profitable. If the crypto itself does not collapse, I think it's totally possible for them to repay that sum in a year or less.

evdubs 2y ago
ByBit's trading volume is almost certainly largely wash trading. Most unregulated crypto exchanges are rife with wash trading. https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783 https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783
plantain 2y ago
Most of the trading is not done by retail traders but at much lower fees than that, if not being paid (market makers). I just can't make it add up.
- spaceman_2020 2y ago
  Hyperliquid, a decentralized perp exchange, is a good proxy for ByBit’s revenues. On an average, Hyperliquid does between 800k-1M in revenue per day. ByBit is substantially bigger and easily does 50-100M in monthly revenue
- reisse 2y ago
  I know! As I stated, > Even considering a huge part of that volume is coming from institutional players who enjoy significantly reduced commission rates... But the volume is huge. Even if we take the best publicly shared MM rates from Bybit (which is 1.5bp taker commission, 0.5bp maker rebate), and assume the whole volume is traded with these rates, it is still 1bp from 40B dollars, which is 4M dollars daily.

ghhrjfkt4k 2y ago

FXCM forex trading broker covered a similar sized loss of client money (not hack) when EUR/CHF was unpegged in 2015. Since it was a profitable broker business, another bigger broker gave them the money to plug the loss in exchange for taking over the business.

cmcaleer 2y ago

These exchanges make an absurd amount of money. That amount of money is basically a decent quarter for Coinbase in fee revenue, and Bybit is smaller but it isn't that much smaller. It sucks if you're Bybit, but they're going to have plenty of lenders happy to provide them liquidity while they make it all back.

scrlk 2y ago
I can understand why some FTX creditors are pissed that the exchange didn't start back up under new management. They would have actually been made whole, unlike the current situation where they're getting "repaid" but pegged to November 2022 valuations (i.e. the absolute bottom of the crypto bear market).

qqqult 2y ago

bybit makes $100 million a month and has substantial excess reserves

rvz 2y ago
A lot more money than the majority of AI startups and it is creating jobs rather than purposefully destroying them.
- laughingcurve 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 2y ago
    Please don't cross into personal attack.
- skeeter2020 2y ago
  yes, great jobs: "I used to have to GO to the casino to play slots, and even without the one arm bandits, had to physically push the button. Now I work from anywhere!"